Thank you for your comments. I agree that the installation of stainless steel studs is more time consuming than applying painted ones, but that is usually the way when, as I see it, a job is done properly. The benefits follow in the long term. I had not considered that some maintenance engineers would regard the drilled stud hole as point of future failure from which a crack might propagate. As studs are laid in a line it might reasonably be expected that a crack would form joining them together, but I have never seen this or any individual crack starting at a stud position. Consequently, this seems an unfounded concern on their part.
The large authority adjacent to mine uses stainless steel studs as a matter of course and have done so for many years, without it seems attracting the ire of the motorcycle fraternity. They have done so for the reasons that I wish to use them, longevity and professional appearance. If there were a road marking system that was more durable than thermoplastic markings everyone would use that. Why would anyone choose not to use a superior alternative if it were available? In the specialist case of road studs a superior alternative is available so it is odd that so many argue against the use of it apparently on the basis of concerns for which I can find no evidence.
I still hope someone can point me toward the convincing evidence that stainless steel studs are a genuine safety problem, not just a perceived one, evidence that shows actual accidents caused by their use. Nothing has been put forward so far. If, as I suspect, no such evidence exists then, given the benefits to be gained, I should logically be able to persuade my colleagues to abandon their objections to their use.