So, easy now. The phase 1/2/3 process has been developed over a long period of time, and has given good results. There are doubtless a lot of ways to do it worse. Deciding to make up a new process on the spot in the middle of a crisis, with a lot of high-anxiety thinking, may not actually deliver a quicker/better result. Plus, the manufacturing is going to be started in parallel with the testing, but we don't have the capacity to manufacture every one of the dozens of vaccines that are in development right now, so which ones do we make "risk starts" on? Well the best way to guess would be to look at the phase 1/phase 2 results, and see which seem most promising.
There are a lot more ways to get it wrong, than to get it right, and we want the quickest, good result, not just the quickest result. Aside from the ethical consequences of experimenting on poor people (and I don't think those are something we should put aside), coming up with a new process on the spot is not even probably the best way to get a good result fast. Would the people who step forward to do that be unusually healthy (hence willing to take the risk), and so throw off the results? Would they be disproportionately people who have already had Covid-19, for the same reason? Would they be different in some other way? Let's not try to wing this. We've got a time-and-battle-tested method for developing a vaccine. I would prefer we use that.
There are a lot more ways to get it wrong, than to get it right, and we want the quickest, good result, not just the quickest result. Aside from the ethical consequences of experimenting on poor people (and I don't think those are something we should put aside), coming up with a new process on the spot is not even probably the best way to get a good result fast. Would the people who step forward to do that be unusually healthy (hence willing to take the risk), and so throw off the results? Would they be disproportionately people who have already had Covid-19, for the same reason? Would they be different in some other way? Let's not try to wing this. We've got a time-and-battle-tested method for developing a vaccine. I would prefer we use that.