The article talks about the importance of strategically analyzing risk minimization and logistical considerations of any place that aims to conduct Controlled Human Infection studies (CHIs). This kind of vaccine development catalyzers have become a matter of debate since the ethical issues surrounding them have not been firmly settled due to the still high number of loose ends about COVID-19. Nevertheless, they are already a reality and a truly global need to overcome this pandemic sooner. The authors accurately point out that the 'non-existent rescue therapy' arguments are perhaps hyperbolized since, actually they are not exclusive of SARS-CoV-2. We know that effective and safe antivirals are not the final real life-saver for patients who get a complicated viral infection. So, appropriate clinical capacities for a thorough and successful treatment reach higher importance than the availability of an specific antiviral drug. Then, to ask for a warranty on this response's possibility does minimize the risk of bad outcomes. Following this line of thought might also contribute to tactics for assessing the risks related to different levels of incidence settings according to location. The more we openly talk about a maybe uncomfortable reality for science, the better chances we get to approach it as ethically right as possible.