Shopsmith Forums

edflorence wrote: Tue Aug 26, 2025 11:05 pm I think I would like to toss in a response to this question and I think I can do so without getting involved in the "Sawstop Good/Sawstop Bad" discussion. The real question to be addressed I believe is whether some new technology to make table saws safer is actually needed, and if such a technology were available, would Shopsmith users adopt it. Before the question can be looked at, we need to know how and in what way tablesaws are unsafe. RF Guy already offered the dreadful statistics on numbers of injuries annually, so to dive a bit deeper I asked Chat GPT for a breakdown of what types of injuries are included. Here is what the AI came up with:

"Summary Answer

Approximately 22,700 of the 31,500 annual U.S. table saw injuries are caused by kickbacks (about 72%).

Blade contact injuries (digit or limb contacting the spinning blade) comprise the large majority—at least 85%, which includes many kickback cases but also other direct contact injuries.

Exact breakdown between kickback-caused blade contact versus other blade contact (like direct hand contact without kickback) isn't specified numerically in available national data beyond those broad percentages.

In short: most injuries happen because of blade contact, and most of those are due to kickback (Emphasis mine)

From this information I draw the conclusion that if kickback can be prevented, the bulk of all injuries can be avoided. I submit that when the upper and lower guards are in place, the splitter or riving knife is in place, featherboards, hold-downs and push sticks are being used and the operator is mindful to stay out of the "danger zones" as indicated in PTWFE, the opportunity for kickback to occur while using a Shopsmith (and presumably any other tablesaw, although my experience there is limited) is reduced to nearly zero. Consequently, there is no need for the SawStop, which is a device that is meant to mitigate harm caused by improper use of the equipment. Any speculation about future safety enhancements to table saws is interesting and I await such advances and in no way oppose them, but right now I feel we already know how to avoid kickback. Granted, some small percentage (sub 10% per Chat GPT) of injuries are from things like getting clothing caught in the blade (where is the guard??) or injuries sustained when moving the equipment, but kickback prevention seems really to be the key to safe use.

"Improper use of equipment" I believe this says almost ball to be said

Within that - maintain control of the work piece (don't ignore the cutoff)

Ed,

Thanks. I wasn't going to respond on this thread again, but you gave a serious response and I will do the same. We have had many good discussions on this forum over the past several years so out of respect and admiration for you I have responded here. First, I need to get the AI out of the way. ALL AI are EVIL and ALL AI LIE. Please don't be under the misguided impression that ChatGPT, or its competitors (Anthropic's Claude, xAI's Grok, Google's Gemini, China's DeepSeek, etc.) are the most advanced AI on this planet. These are bastard step-children of an AI that has been here for much, much longer. AI is a banned technology in this universe. Rest assured these abominations will be exterminated soon. Okay, so you don't believe me or may not believe me yet. In the meantime, then preoccupy yourself with Earth based science. A recent MIT study showed significant cognitive declines of users of ChatGPT, so I implore everyone to stop using ANY AI of any type. Great societies are remembered as much for the technologies they chose NOT to create as for the technologies they chose to create. Many great societies in this universe and beyond have chosen NOT to create AI. I say this to emphasize that all technology is NOT progress so don't assume because ChatGPT is being talked about in the news, hyped up, etc. that it is a good thing. It is EVIL.

Okay, with that out of the way, I don't know if I can trust what ChatGPT told you. Let's assume that a good majority of tablesaw injuries do involve a kickback. The first question I would have is was the injury caused by the kickback or was it secondary to being injured? I think we would assume the former, but I just want to point out that any loss of control while using a tablesaw could cause an injury and that a kickback might be a secondary effect due to loss of control. I think we can all agree that reducing, eliminating kickbacks should be a goal of EVERY woodworker so I agree with you that if a technology like Jessem's Clear-Cut TS™ Stock Guides (OR competing product) could prevent tablesaw injuries then that would be great. BUT, they aren't regulated. Should they be? I mean if there are sufficient cases of kickbacks on tablesaws and IF they would prevent injuries, shouldn't they be regulated or at the very least a standard option for purchase on EVERY tablesaw direct from the manufacturer??? From my viewpoint, it seems like most of the woodworking community sees product safety as a byproduct of wanting to avoid litigation and damage payout should an injury occur, i.e. it is NOT benevolent. Every modern safety feature seems to be driven by this and unfortunately has required regulation to do so. Think of seatbelts, airbags, that lawnmower pull handle, etc., etc. Some would cheer the CPSC NOT going ahead with a regulation here on tablesaws, but I do not share that opinion. IF we took SawStop out of it, I am just wondering if those who oppose regulation would still oppose it? IF so, do you want to remove seatbelts and airbags from your car as well because this is a similar case of government regulation being forced on manufacturers to save lives and prevent/minimize injuries. Also, these added safety features always cost the consumer more money.

You mention putting every Shopsmith safety system on the Mark V and believe that will prevent a kickback. For me, there are times when the upper saw guard is just impractical depending on the type of cut, but I can still use my Jessem guides in such a scenario. What about when the fence is out of alignment causing pinching at the back of the sawblade? Even a few thou is enough to cause a kickback. Maybe your fence got bumped out of alignment - are you going to check it before every cut? My point is you can't assume that everything is perfect with every cut, but a new safety system might cover these deficiencies. Again this may be a dream, but if a new technology existed, doesn't necessarily have to be AIM, that would prevent these accidents, I would hope a majority of woodworkers would embrace this and be willing to pay for it. Unfortunately, I think the true answer, as with the auto and lawnmower examples, is that what is perceived as an overbearing government agency will have to step in with regulation one day to make it happen.

Excerpt from MIT Study on Cognitive Decline in ChatGPT Users:
"A recent brain-scan study from MIT on ChatGPT users reveals something unexpected.
Instead of enhancing mental performance, long-term AI use may actually suppress it.
After four months of cognitive tracking, the findings suggest we’re measuring productivity the wrong way

Participants were scanned while using ChatGPT.
→ 83.3% couldn’t recall a single sentence they’d written just moments earlier.
→ Meanwhile, users writing without AI had no trouble remembering.
Brain function scores dropped—from 79 to 42.
→ That’s a 47% decline in neural activity.
→ The steepest drop among all groups studied.

Even after they stopped using ChatGPT, those users still showed reduced engagement.
→ Their scores stayed lower than those who never used AI.
→ This points to more than just habit—it suggests cognitive decline.

Teachers also critiqued the essays.
→ They were technically correct but often described as “flat,” “lifeless,” and “lacking substance.”

Here’s the contradiction:
→ ChatGPT speeds up task completion by 60%…
→ But cuts mental effort in learning by 32%.

The group with the highest performance?
→ Those who started without AI and added it later.
→ They kept strong memory, high brain activity, and top scores.

Using ChatGPT might feel productive—but it can lead to mental disengagement.
→ It boosts speed, but dulls thought.
→ It offers answers, but limits growth.

Well I have been silent through this recent deluge of opinion.

I appreciate Ed's response as it confirms my opinion.

That is, much of the hysteria is the inadvertent cause of kickback. I believe most of the kick-back incidents are the result of inadequate CONTROL of the workpiece. The safety mantra nowadays is to use some type of pusher between the operator's hand and the workpiece. If ever there was a recipe for failure is the use of a push stick. One can not adequately CONTROL the workpiece. One can push with it and possibly exert downward pressure but minimal sideways motion CONTROL is likely.

FWIW I have yet to experience this dreaded event, but have experienced events that could have resulted in it had I not have been able to exert better control of the workpiece.

Now in the interest of full disclosure, I must admit to having been 'lucky' on many occasions including poking my finger into the spinning jointer blades(each knife made conact once each). Yes I was doing something totally stupid that caused the "accident".

I do agree with use of guards and riving knife when feasible(even when inconvenient), but thinking any bureaucratic entity should have mandate power is absurd. We are all responsible for our own actions/inactions including inadequate knowledge of how something might be hazardous. I agree making information freely available is a proper function for big brother.


I just noticed there is another page to this thread, so this may be 'untimely'.

I am responsible for my safety.

Jd1a wrote: Thu Aug 28, 2025 1:09 pm I am responsible for my safety.

Bottom line, this is the truth.

However ( you knew there would be a "but" ) responsible choices require adequate information as to potential consequences. This is where reliable advice from trustworthy sources comes in, and sometimes the reliable source is a solid manual like PTWFE and sometimes it is a government agency. As we know, for-profit industries have shown, historically, a tendency to push profit and productivity at the risk of employee safety, so there is indeed a role for OSHA and MSHA regulations for the workplace. In my mind these regulations are intended to prevent workers suffering the consequences of poor decisions made by non-users of the equipment. Not all decisions can be made by the equipment user...think being impacted while driving by an impaired driver...in that situation, the seat belt is to protect you from another driver's poor choices. Should those regulations and mandates force hobby and recreational users of power tools to adhere to the same standards of safety? Personally, I would say "no." So, if SawStop or other similar devices were to become required for businesses and school woodshops, that would be OK with me. In my own shop, though, I would view such regulations as unneeded. I feel I can minimize risks to a tolerable level with my own decisions, and I take responsibility for my own safety.

RF Guy...many thanks for letting us know about the MIT study. Wow! that was an eye opener. Fortunately, I have been using Chat GPT and Gemini as alternative search engines only. So far I have not "out-sourced" any creative activities like writing. I have been following an AI researcher named Gary Marcus for the last few years and for a long time he has been waving the red flag about the unreliability of LLM's.

JPG...thanks for making once more the strong case for featherboards. I agree 100%

Ed, JPG,

Thanks. It is difficult for me to discern from your comments whether your opposition is due to a fierce independence and confidence in your abilities or a deep distrust of government or perhaps both??? While I want every woodworker to be fully confident in their abilities, I will guide that overconfidence tends to lend towards an eventual accident as none of us are perfect. Even experienced and proficient woodworkers can one day have an accident. I applaud anyone that has never had a woodworking or tool related accident in their shops, so if that is really true then congrats. Whatever you are doing, push stick or no push stick is clearly working so don't change on my account. Like people, governments and companies are not perfect either. One aspect to government on this planet is it presents a set of checks and balances against corporations doing the wrong thing because like Ed mentioned corporations are greedy. You may not like the push mower grab handle or cut off switch on the seat of a riding mower that tells the lawnmower that a human is present, but it is there for a reason and it is there because of a regulation. Sure, you can choose to bypass them, but you also accept the consequences in doing so. IF I could summarize what I am hearing so far, it is "I know what is best and I don't want my government interfering with my freedom". There is nothing wrong with being confident, but one has to also know one's limitations. You can't foresee every circumstance and safety devices/systems are there to protect us when we need them most. IF you are so confident in your abilities, then why not drive without seatbelts? Of course, I don't want you to do that, but I am trying to make a point here...perhaps failing at it still. Maybe this is the problem, outside of SawStop, I don't have a concrete example of what this new safety system could be. Without it, you can't imagine what could be different. What if it wasn't a regulation inspired, but say Shopsmith invented this new safety system? Would all of you suddenly be onboard with using it then?

RFGuy wrote: Thu Aug 28, 2025 6:05 pm Ed, JPG,

What if it wasn't a regulation inspired, but say Shopsmith invented this new safety system? Would all of you suddenly be onboard with using it then?

RF Guy;
Good Question.

As I recall, this thread was prompted because SawStop was trying to get legislation in place to require its technology on new equipment. I think what rubbed a lot of us the wrong way was the effort was to get a specific proprietary technology mandated. The issue is not that the SawStop technology isn't amazing, helpful and potentially able to eliminate many accidents, but that no company should be able to create legislation to increase sales of its own product. If Shopsmith invented a new safety system and tried to force the entire industry to adopt its specific system, that too would rub me the wrong way.

Also, the question of whether the SawStop sensing technology could be adapted to the Shopsmith raised the possibility that a law requiring saws to be so equipped would be the end of Shopsmith. I think that possibility was a real worry to a lot of folks on this forum.

I do not consider the government to be "meddling" in the lives of its citizens by, say, requiring builders to conform to the Uniform Building Code or the Electrical Code or other such public safety laws. Despite my Idaho roots,I am not completely anti "big government." For example, I would be OK if, for products intended for personal use, the government were to mandate a warning label. Manufacturers could then offer versions of their products with the optional safety features that would let them market the product without the warning label and let the consumer choose.

Ed,

Thanks. Yeah, I tried much earlier in this thread to get at the root for why so many on this thread dislike the proposed CPSC regulation. Just for my own understanding. As you know there was A LOT of anti-SawStop bias on the thread, which is why when I asked my most recent questions I tried to get at the heart of any opposition. Let's assume we live in a world where SawStop doesn't exist, never existed. What then? We still have accidents causing 30k to 40k lives to be impacted every year...and that is in the United States alone. Back in college I took a class titled the History of Technology and it was one of the best electives I ever took. Over history there have been times when a superior technology was NOT adopted by society. Many times being forgotten, i.e. lost to time so-to-speak. In modern times you might remember Sony's Betamax which lost out to VHS tape as just one example. From my own career on this planet, how about Motorola which had superior performance cellphone hardware, which lost out to Apple's iPhone which presented a new software interface with really, really bad hardware underneath. I still cringe when I think of how bad the audio quality and call quality was on my first couple of iPhones. I am getting off track, but hopefully you get the point. So, I wonder IF we, as a society, don't take a technology path, what is the reason??? All of you may have very valid reasons for why you choose to reject all new tablesaws having some new proposed required technology and I wanted to hear them, but I don't want to read more negativity and hate on SawStop - there's been enough of that already on this thread IMHO. Think what you will of Steve Gass as clearly I can't change your minds at this time, but many in the woodworking community, at least outside of Shopsmith community, rave on SawStop's technology and I do believe there are quite a few testaments out there by owners saved by this technology. SawStop, IMHO is a more recent American success story, just as Shopsmith was a success story for many decades in the past. SawStop has been so successful that they got acquired by TTS Tooltechnic Systems. In another reality, perhaps King Oompa Loompa would have had the US government buy SawStop instead and forced everyone to use it on every tablesaw - I mean he recently made Intel give him 10% ownership for what was originally legislated to be a grant through the CHIPS act. I digress...we have an Oompa Loompa as a sitting US president and more problems than I care to count at the moment, so what's the point? I retract my frivolous questions. Even if the US government took action here, they would inevitably cause more problems than they proposed to solve, given our current state of affairs. Again, I say nevermind, but thanks for indulging me here and thanks for the thoughtful responses by everyone involved. We will all have to wait a little longer for our society to change for the better here...I dream of that day. What I will leave you with is societies have to decide what technologies they want and don't want. The WHY behind that is ALWAYS important.

I can only presume you're talking about me when you talk about "hate on SawStop". I suggest you go back and re-read what I wrote. It's nothing to do with "hate". Do I disagree with SawStop trying to legislatively gain a monopoly under the guise of safety? Absolutely yes. But I would say the same of any company. If DeWalt, or Powermatic, or Shopsmith had come up with some sort of analogous technology and taken the same path I would feel the same. (As you know Shopsmith did design and patent featherguards and pushsticks which have become ubiquitous. Shopsmith gave away that IP for free.)

And you've yet to acknowledge that I did directly address your hypothetical.

Like a broken record...