Many people believe that scientific research should be carried out and controlled by governments rather than private companies. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Many people believe that scientific research should be carried out and controlled by governments rather than private companies. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

The pursuit of scientific knowledge has always been a treacherous yet captivating process, not only to the elite but also the ordinary. Due to how integral it is to human civilization, many believe that such research should be funded and monitored by the government to ensure a focus on public interest. Personally, not only do I agree with the sentiment, but I also contend that any privately-controlled research should be heavily supervised by assigned agents of the state to avoid any potential biased reporting from these entities.
It is undeniable that state-funded scientific research, either carried out through prestigious universities or research councils, prioritizes public inquiries over financial returns. Such inquiries often revolve around environmental and societal concerns that bear little to no commercial value to private entities. For instance, the Science to Achieve Results grant awarded by the US government has funded various non-profits research on the impact of various environmental issues including hazardous wastes and microplastic particles on public health. These efforts shed light on how industries are destroying both the planet as well as its residents, and expose the lies perpetuated by major corporations about how such wastes are safe ecologically.
In addition, results gathered from government-controlled studies are often publicly available for all to access, allowing for greater transparency and scrutiny both domestically and globally. This not only opens up new conversations among experts but also facilitates the process of policy-making, catering to public interest. Meanwhile, privately-funded studies may subject to internal manipulation, reporting results that paint the investing companies in a good light, including downplaying the negative health effects of processed food or overestimating the effectiveness of pharmaceutical products, all for the sake of profits. Hence, I argue that the presence of state-delegated agents would deter such acts from occurring in the first place.
Granted, state-funded studies are not without its flaws as they are often subject to bureaucracy, potentially slowing down its progress. However, it is often the case that such delays are caused not entirely by political interventions but rather by rigorous peer reviews, which can take months or even years. Such a process allows experts to identify inconsistencies within the methodologies and results as well as ensuring that the studies stay true to their scientific goal and integrity.
In conclusion, I am adamant that state-owned and regulated studies would bring about the most consistent efficiency thanks to their priority for transparency and public interest, and that any privately-funded ones must require the presence of a state-delegated agents to ensure such scientific integrity.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng:

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng:

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng:

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng:

Bài sửa mẫu