124
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] FlowVoid@midwest.social 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

she accepted the risk of leaving it in

It doesn't say that. It says she was willing to pay to keep it in, which means she was willing to pay for long-term maintenance. But there was nobody willing to provide maintenance, because the company dissolved. That is why she was advised to remove the device.

the company was forced to liquidate assets

Implants generally go in the garbage after removal.

Implants that failed to gain FDA approval definitely go in the garbage after removal. Nobody else wants them, in fact the company will end up having to pay for proper disposal of medical waste.

[-] Gaywallet@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago

It doesn’t say that.

Yes I very clearly stated what my *guess *was. Nothing says enough to determine what truly happened here. As someone who works in the medical field, I'm making an educated guess based on my knowledge of how medical devices, elective surgeries, and governing bodies work.

this post was submitted on 02 Sep 2023
124 points (99.2% liked)

Science

13006 readers
20 users here now

Studies, research findings, and interesting tidbits from the ever-expanding scientific world.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


Be sure to also check out these other Fediverse science communities:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS