Problem with anecdotal evidence is that it's by it's very nature biased. You cannot base everything off your own experiences, least of all public health and safety.
I recently served a customer who told me she frequently eats partially uncooked chicken and has never gotten food poisoning in her life. I even encountered a gentleman who admitted the same thing, though he did it rather infrequently. If I were to apply this "evidence" then should I follow basic food safety laws regarding chicken (I sometimes work in the Delicatessen)? I mean if this lady and this other bloke don't get salmonella poisoning from eating partially cooked chicken, surely that disproves the link between salmonella and one getting sick right? I shouldn't have to worry about changing gloves when I handle raw chicken and then I have to handle ham. I shouldn't have to ensure that cooked chickens are above a certain temperature before putting them out for sale. I shouldn't have to worry about wrapping up raw chicken in it's own separate Deli paper. I mean, I can chuck in everything they order in the one bag, ham, chicken, fish, beef etc and then just give them all the required barcodes. I mean, surely those two specific people I encountered even disproves the idea of food poisoning to begin with! So cross contamination when handling raw meat should be a non issue. I shouldn't even use the special form of bleach (we call it Break Up) to clean scales, benches or the slicer. Hell why even bother putting the meat away over night? I should just leave it out in the open. Because that man and lady didn't get sick from something we know causes sickness, then it should be a total non issue. No one else can possibly get food poisoning, right?
See it doesn't work like that, mate.