I don't have any objection to developing and distributing a vaccine, but it's deployment without sufficient testing. Had the disease become widespread, as you note it would have been worth the additional risk, but in the event, it made the occurrence of any serious side effects seem more egregious. These kinds of things just feed into the anti-vaccination movement and if that overall hurts vaccination rates long term, rushing a vaccine that ends up having side effects could negatively affect public health.
I am not sure how you can catch something that’s at 6 per 100,000 without giving it to an very large group of people. There are so many unusual conditions that such problems are going to look like statistical noise until your distributing something to around a million people.
