Governments should be responsible for funding and controlling scientific research rather than private organizations. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Many people get hold of the idea that

instead

of private sectors, governments should support

research

projects

to guarantee their scientific quality and

also

supervise them to ensure they are aimed at the public best interest. I completely agree with

this

idea. Governmental

institutes

, which are financed by the taxpayer, have access to extensive human and technical resources that enable them to consider meticulous details in the process of scientific

research

, which in turn prevent biases.

This

is

in contrast

to private companies that own restricted financial resources,

thus

their

projects

may be more susceptible to mistakes.

For instance

, performing multicentre clinical studies, which are the most reliable type of medical studies, need an enormous budget so they can only be supported by grants from federal

institutes

such

as NIH. If these

institutes

did not provide grants for

such

trials, private companies could not afford to run them, which in turn would reduce the medical science progress. From another perspective, nongovernmental

institutes

might prioritize their profit over ethical aspects of their

research

projects

which may confound their discoveries.

For instance

, in Canada, once a pharmaceutical company was convicted for data fabrication, as it had manipulated the clinical results of a study on its produced medication.

This

example illustrates why authorities should supervise medical

research

and keep them in the public best interest.

Nevertheless

, it will be always possible for the companies to manipulate

research

projects

' results for their own purposes. In conclusion, I believe governments should be the main funder and supervisor of the scientific

projects

,

Remove the comma

apply

show examples

so that they can prevent them from errors and keep them beneficial for all citizens.