The thing about selling all of those drugs, devices, and solutions is that a lot can go wrong. Nearly every product that Baxter delivers is a matter of life and death. But when the outcome is death, it can be incredibly difficult to determine a treatment's effectiveness. Was the death normal and predictable? Or did the treatment somehow fail? The answers aren't always obvious. If medical-products companies pulled their wares every time someone died, there would be no medical products. "
The FDA and other international toxicology boards require exhaustive testing of medical devices. Something slipped up here. Where is the tradeoff between attention to profits and concern for consumers? What have other companies done? How can this be quantified?
The tradeoff between attention to profits and concern for consumers lie in the exhaustiveness of testing undertaken for each drug. The more testing a company or FDA does, the more it costs the economy and the company, the fewer the profits of the company. Thus the company has an incentive to do as little testing as possible in order to maximize its profits. On the other ...
The solution answers the question(s) below.