People who put their lives at risk for the sake of society have the legitimate right to receive a fair payment in return. However, as the authors of this article state, for some reason, the line of thought changes when we talk about medical research. They conducted surveys in the UK with the two main characters of the Human Challenge Studies (CHIM): experts on the topic and the general public.Thankfully, both groups agreed payment for CHIMs participants should exist, but experts thought the amount should be much less than what was hypothetically articulated in the survey’s scenarios. The general public showed openness to accepting partaking in CHIMs and rightly drawing the connecting justice line between risk and payment. This article states that standardization of a fair payment could be built upon the lines of Payment for Risk Model, pay per hour, or increment of minimum wage payment due to risk and pain. This work sheds a worthy light on one of the many debatable aspects of any CHIM. The fact that there is a faster way to develop a vaccine during this devastating pandemic should, by any means, translate in unethical scientific decision making.