“…Within the context of benefit-cost analysis, the use of a pesticide would be regulated so that the marginal benefit of the regulation (costs avoided by reducing risks) equals marginal cost (lost economic benefits). 83,84 According to Breyer, if the marginal cost of risk reduction (the cost of preventing the last unit of adverse effect, such as saving a statistical life) is greater for some regulations than others, risks could be reduced more costeffectively by making regulations with higher marginal cost less stringent and/or those with lower marginal cost more stringent. 85 The FQPA increased regulatory flexibility, on the one hand, by resolving the Delaney Paradox, but reduced flexibility, on the other, by imposing risk standards in place of risk-benefit comparisons.…”