Sure this but also: the evidence does exist and it will be a huge expensive, inconvenience, and maybe dangerous unnecessary tests/surgery for >90% of the population. Really someone has to do the math to determine the inflection point; X% of people will get some early cancer/positive result found early, Y% will get a false-positive and undergo expensive and unnecessary procedures, and Z% will still get a false result but have cost some amount of money and time.
From a public health perspective, this is unlikely to be the best-next-thing because so many people die from more preventable diseases/things or lack access to health care at all. Is it a obvious service for the upper class in SF? Certainly, because the market thinks they are 5-30x more valuable than the average person so 2.5k is nothing to be extra certain of their survival.
Does that sound weirdly dystopian? Sure, but it is just moving your chance of living (for the next year as our unit) by 0.00001% or less. Most people would not spend 2.5k on a 1/100k outcome.