It's a brain dead analogy as are most of these types of analogies. The implicit assumption (and therefore critical flaw in the logic) is that driving with lights on (which is obviously sensible and good) is equivalent to getting the experimental gene therapy (i.e., an unquestionable good in mind of the person expressing the analogy).

We simply disagree that it's a good. All the additional bullshit beyond that is just window dressing around the initially flawed assumption.