I can imagine a scenario where the testing takes 15 years, and a scenario where the testing is done in 1 year. I think it's probably wrong to look at it purely as "we should wait X years". The author describes the 15 years as "regulatory limbo" implying that it was known as safe before that, but I have no idea whether that's the case.

In general, you have to weigh the irreversible cost of unintended consequences with the irreversible cost of known human death from mosquitoes.

From what I understood, they didn't spend 15 years collecting data on the efficacy and risks of the product. Much of it was spent just waiting for regulators to respond.

The bacterial solution was the one that was fast tracked, while the safer genetic modification was delayed more.