Many would argue that scientific research requires a degree of oversight from the relevant governmental authorities. properly handled, this is a sensible and necessary policy. What are the advantages and disadvantages of this?

Supervision of responsible authorities in scientific research has always been debated. While some people do not agree with

this

oversight. I believe that there will be some necessary benefits and drawbacks to consider. On the one hand, the major reason that scientific studies need to be supervised is because of human safety.

For example

, there is some evidence in the past that underhanded

projects

will result in human injuries to both researchers themselves and people nearby.

Furthermore

, another main reason for monitoring is that to control the

project

budget, some

projects

' benefits are not worth the cost that the government needs to spend .

Therefore

, to manage

projects

some basic regulations and supervision are needed.

On the other hand

, there are significant disadvantages of having government intervention while working on complex scientific research.

Firstly

, it is going to delay the

project

, many procedures need to be implemented for monitoring.

Consequently

, the

project

will result in more financial needs.

For example

, if researchers are working on a small

project

, they can work independently. But, many people,

such

as administrators, and receptionists, will be involved which will delay

projects

and increase costs

further

. In conclusion, there are both advantages and disadvantages of government intervention in scientific research. It is necessary to regulate and supervise human safety and control the budget, but both should not delay or over budget than it should be.