@jim18 I definitely know folks that have done, and will do this. They are usually the ones with the most experience.
Dr. Scholz was correct in stating that the trials on whether this had better or worse long-term recurrence are not mature yet. So, we really don't know either way. But the chances of side effects are definitely lower.

One reason is that is done live, in-bore with a perimetric MRI. So the doc is viewing exactly what is happening live and the AI programs delineate the borders everywhere. Not perfect but any movement happens live where as most radiation, e.g., is done with static CT scans taken earlier. Truebore, Cyberkife and other brands have mechanisms to deal with those movements with the main one being the use of fiducials. Not a fan of the side effects with those either but the machine developed and trialed at UCLA gets around that with better technology (they claim) with 4 shots per second as the doc also sees live what is happening and any movement stops the machine instantly.

Most of side effect information for radiation are based on older technology but again we don't have mature data on the newer machines or many of the full ablation approaches to know with certainty.

I will trade a shorter life with less toxicities if that is the choice I get to make. The beauty of having options. No one size fits all. Tradeoffs. Always tradeoffs. Do your research with as little bias as possible and pick your poison.