Aviatr:
That's simply incorrect. What you are probably referring to is the article by Arthur Kellerman, claiming that a person was 43 times more likely to be killed by a gun in their home than to use that gun to kill an intruder. In particular, he said that: "for every case of self-protection homicide involving a firearm kept in the home, there were 1.3 accidental deaths, 4.6 criminal homicides and 37 suicides involving firearms."
That study itself has been greatly criticized in the academic world, and Kellerman himself has admitted it is flawed in that: "Studies such as ours do not include cases in which intruders are wounded or frightened away by the use or display of a firearm...." Kellerman has since issued a followup paper, reducing the odds to 4:1, but still hasn't addressed many of his critics.
Regardless of how you feel about the Kellerman study as a whole, it never discussed disarming. In fact, if you check the US FBI Uniform Crime Reports, you will see that the safest way to respond to an attempted armed robbery is to draw your own gun. Persons who did so were less likely to die or be injured than those who complied or tried to fight without a weapon.
I've studied handgun retention and disarming, using a system taught to many US police officers. Disarming is certainly a threat, but it is quite risky (to the person attempting the disarm) and can be countered.
OFBSLF
Massachusetts State Police Certified Firearms Safety Instructor