What that statement doesn't address is the severity of injuries. And who is collecting data on injuries vs saw manufacturer anyway, besides SS? Emergency rooms? So of course the only available hard data would be from SS.

My understanding of how CPSC works is that their mandate is to regulate when there is a meaningful and practical opportunity to improve product safety. They would do that by trying to estimate the economic impact on the country of lost man-hours, medical costs, and lost future earnings for people with permanent injuries. That is, the financial impact on the economy and how many such injuries could be prevented. And how much the safer technology would cost. Cost vs benefit. So an effective argument against regulation should be on that basis, not on personal experience.

I dont think it's been too long since many experienced users used to brag about working without blade guards. New users, in the absence of any training requirements by retailers or manufacturers, were told they weren't necessary by the collective knowledge base. And manufacturers resisted going to riving knives until there were new designs and a consumer expectation that saws have them.