This is a very odd take to me given the focus of the article is that companies are explicitly saying "If you have severe allergies, don't buy this product", but the FDA is saying this isn't good enough. That is, the whole focus of the article is that these companies
don't want to sell to consumers who may have severe allergies.
Honestly, I side with the companies on this one. It's just a matter of incentives - if the consequence of "getting it wrong" (i.e. saying a product is free of an allergen but then through some chance of cross-contamination that it ends up killing somebody) are enormous, I think it's hard to fault a company that then decides to explicitly add nuts, sesame, etc. to a product and explicitly state "You should not eat this if you have allergies."
More to your point, though, when you say "Which is one reason why some people will be tempted to roll the dice and end up dead or in the ER", I think that's huge hyperbole. Every single person I've ever known that has a severe allergy never "rolls the dice", and on the contrary they are extremely diligent about double checking that what they eat is allergen free. On the flip side, I've known people that have mild allergies to products (e.g. symptoms are on the level of lactose intolerance) who don't worry about avoiding trace amounts of allergens. Why conflate these 2 cases? I have certainly never known actual people with these differing levels of allergies to confuse their issues.