This thread is becoming more emotional than factual and I am sure it is partly because there are so few proven facts on the subject. It is in danger of falling out of control much as the previous thread did on the same topic.
Here are some more circumstantial but substantive issues to be considered:-
Tyron have been around for many years, thus it is reasonable to assume that the safety gain would have been well publicised and become endemic within the motor and tyre industries.
Tyron bands are what are generically know in patents as 'wheel well fillers'. They work by preventing the bead of a deflated tyre wall from dislodging from the edges of the wheel rim and travelling to the 'well ' near the centre of the wheel rim.
The theory is that by retaining the bead on the rim-plateau the constraint will also keep the tread pattern supported, and thus improve the wheels grip to the road surface. This in turn will allow braking and steerage of the wheel to retain some effect. This relies on the integrity of the tyre wall being largely maintained and coupling the tread to the bead and to the rim.
A Google search using 'Tyre bands', 'Tire bands' and 'wheel well fillers' as the search criteria only revealed one other manufacture of such devices - Protectall of South Africa. There are numerous patents for such devices, but it seems very few manufacturers. Other references seem to be a heavy metal group.
If the technology had been proven I am sure there would be far more web based sites for manufactures and sales. The fact that an internet search revealed such a dearth of sites can be interpolated as indicating the effectiveness of such systems is questionable.
I am also quite sure that if such bands had been shown to make a big improvement in safety, I believe that car manufacturers would have been offering such systems as standard; in much the same way the ABS has become standard. I would also expect organisations such as NCAP, and the EU vehicle construction and use regulations would have made it well known that such systems offered effective safety gains and may have made them obligatory in vehicle design.
Whilst it cannot be assumed that the above circumstances do discredit such products, I believe it is highly significant.
When looking at the advertising of these products it is easy to swayed into believing the scenarios they show are realistic, but give careful analytical consideration, and the information they give can be seen to be highly biased, and it may not accurately reflect real life situations.
Consider what is known about a tyre blow out. This is usually associated with a well worn or a faulty tyre, where the side-wall fabrication looses integrity, usually a significant part of the wall has failed. It is not just a small hole that might be formed by a high velocity bullet or a small explosive demonstration charge on a tyre that is otherwise in good condition.
How controllable would the same outfit in the same circumstances be without the bands fitted?
What would be the outcome if a typical potential blow out tyre had been fitted instead?
It is so important to consider both what is and isn't shown, because advertisers are hell bent on trying to sell their product to you, they will try to only show their product in a good light and blinker you to the whole truth.
I do not claim these companies are acting illegally, but you must take a broader view and consider all the facts that are available.
If you feel happier to have the bands fitted, I am sure they offer no disadvantage, but I do not believe they offer much if any benefit compared to maintaining your tyres in good condition and checking for proper inflation.