Imagine a scenario where there is a viral outbreak that threatens to affect 90% of the population and is likely to kill 50% of the people who get infected.
If a pharmaceutical firm develops a vaccine or treatment that protects everyone from infection but has potentially deadly side effects for 1% of the people who take it, you don’t want them keeping it off the market over that 1% and depriving the other 99% of a life-saving product.
In a limited way, it does make sense.
All vaccines have a potential to kill you. Look in the literature for even the flu vaccine (very safe). Some people go into shock and die.
But it creates a dangerous situation. I used the Remington trigger as an example for a reason. Rifles are by their nature, dangerous. Having some liability shield in place makes sense, but that in this case gave cover to a firm to market and make a poor design that got people hurt for decades, rather than have a recall.
It is a balancing act, and having seen it play out a few times I am not comfortable that this point with the treatments (especially since I had covid with few issues already pre vax).