7A. “Today’s unanimous vote by the Commission to approve an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPR) on table saw blade contact injuries should send a clear signal to consumers and the industry…”

7B. This is claiming that the unanimous vote by the Commission for ANPR should send a clear signal to the industry

7C. This is a causal claim, saying that because the vote was unanimous, that a clear signal should be sent to the industry in effect

7D. This claim difficult to assess on accuracy because it is an opinion and not a fact.  This is a low quality claim because it operates under the assumption that the Commission  would send or want to send a “clear signal” to consumers and industry.  The logic of this claim is easy to see, saying that because the Commission’s vote was unanimous that the industry should follow in their belief.  This claim isn’t very persuasive, and doesn’t really make an attempt to persuade people into its belief.