Everyone understands the case when (A) you approve something that later turns out to kill people.
The other case (B), when you don't approve something that would have saved lives is much less understood, but those people are just as dead as those from case A.
One famous case B is when the FDA only approved beta blockers 17 years after other major countries. This cost ~10k US lives per year, or ~170k lives total.
Because A errors produces headlines and scandals, while B errors are just the normal deaths we are used to, the FDA is heavily incentivized to minimize A errors, regardless of the B error rate.
The point is that case B is both harder to notice and at least potentially _much_ worse than case A. And it's the case that the FDA currently errs towards.