Ok there's been some comment about evidence, fact and opinion. In my summary of the arguments for and against chlling I have tried to differentiate between opinion and evidence:
For canning, this is not comparable to cubing since the regulations for canned food require brief heating to achieve commercial preservation. This varies with the acidity and type of food, typically 3mins at 250F (121C) (though 0.5- 6 mins is quoted as the range with typical foods). US food and safety regs for example
https://www.fsis.usda.gov/shared/PDF/FSRE_SS_3PrinciplesThermal.pdf?redirecthttp=true
Pasteurisation arguments about temperature over time below boiling, relates to removal of pathogens to low enough level to store foodstuffs when refrigerated for longer periods. Since wort is not fermented at refrigerated (<5C), and that spoilage organisms aren't necessarily pathogenic, the idea of pasteurisation being as effective as sterilisation doesn't apply in this setting:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B012227055X001590
Applying these arguments to beer specifically is laid out in this article:
https://beerandwinejournal.com/botulism/Low incidence, high impact risk relating to botulism contamination, a v low risk but high impact.
For a detailed review of the microbial environment in wort to beer this is actually quite readable:
https://mmbr.asm.org/content/77/2/157With the following pertinent quote:
Following the mash, wort is boiled for an extended period, effectively sterilizing the wort. However, wort is a nutrient-rich, high-pH (∼5.5) medium, so once it leaves the kettle it is vulnerable to opportunistic spoilage agents if appropriate precautions are not taken to ensure rapid fermentation, which serves to stabilize the wort against most contaminants.
So to go back to my previous comments, yes each to their own. This is all about risk reduction/mitigation. As with all risks many people will not see the risk become an issue due to the low frequency of the risk, but that doesn't mean the risk doesn't exist. ie just because you haven't had a problem with no chill doesn't mean it's not a risk.
It is of course an individual decision whether to take the risks that relate to no chill and indeed you may spend a lifetime brewing and not experience a problem, but it is important to do so with eyes open to the concerns and recognition that those concerns are indeed evidence based and valid.
Anna (apologies for getting all academic again... bit of a habit, sorry)