Surely following an RA is NEVER dangerous (unless it is to descend below Safety Altitude), NOT following an RA MAY be dangerous. Hence following an RA is ALWAYS safe (bearing in mind the caveat of Safety Altitude). Not following an RA MAY be unsafe, so don't do it, it can never be justified on safety grounds: always, always, always, follow the RA and be SAFE.
Simple really
Not that simple.
An example was given up-thread (#35) of a case where following an RA would have been dangerous. In the case quoted, the danger was (a) obvious and (b) due to equipment failure external to the TCAS, but that doesn't alter the fact that the TCAS could and did give an incorrect indication which should not have been followed.
If you always, always, always follow an RA, what are you there for? Why isn't the TCAS linked directly to the flight controls to make the aircraft do what it says? Because nobody with any sense trusts any automatic system to always, always, always work correctly. 99% of the time, maybe 99.5%, but not 100%. The 0.5% is why you're there, and why the ICAO document says "Nothing in the procedures specified ... shall prevent pilots-in-command from exercising their best judgment and full authority in the choice of the best course of action to resolve a traffic conflict or avert a potential collision." To adapt an old saying, engage brain before operating controls.
In this way, TCAS is much like a car's satnav (though much more complex). 99.5% of the time your satnav gives you correct guidance. The 0.5% is when it tells you to drive off the dock into the water.