Scientists believe that all research involving humans has the potential of creating disastrous consequences. Therefore, governments should refrain from funding such research

While I understand the sentiment that governments should refrain from funding more research which could have catastrophic results, I think that this sentiment is one-sided and ineffective. Yes, research could indeed create disastrous results; however, some research has beneficial consequences which outweigh these negative ones. Two examples of this would be the advancement of modern medicine and the exploration of outer space, both of which have enabled the human race to expand its knowledge and capabilities

While it is true that medical research has the potential to create disastrous results, there are countless examples where this has not happened. For instance, the polio vaccine developed by Jonas Salk saved countless lives, and antibiotics have saved countless lives. The benefits of these discoveries far surpass any possible negative outcomes. Furthermore, research has also led to the development of many other life-saving medicines, such as the anti-inflammatory drug ibuprofen, which was discovered in 1964. Humankind has benefited from new discoveries in technology as well, such as the internet, which has allowed for the sharing of information. While the internet has its negative aspects, it also has many beneficial uses, such as the ability to contact others all over the world in an instant. Another technology with positive uses is space travel, which has led to discoveries such as the theory of relativity and penicillin. While both of these discoveries had unforeseen consequences, space research has also led to many discoveries with positive consequences, such as the identification of water on Mars, which has led to the possibility of finding life on other planets. Ultimately, the most beneficial outcomes from research are discovered long after they have been conducted, so governments should not be afraid to fund research which could have disastrous consequences

Since the benefits derived from some research are discovered long after they have been conducted, the governments least likely to fund such research are ones which base their decisions on the short-term, such as the political or monetary system. The short-term nature of the political or monetary system makes it dangerously easy to be swayed by popular opinion rather than rational thought. An example of this would be the recent push by some governments to ban genetically modified crops. While genetically modified crops are currently used around the world, there is great concern among some citizens about their potential long-term effects. However, scientists have conducted extensive research into these crops and concluded that there is no evidence to suggest that such crops have negative health effects. Furthermore, the consumption of genetically modified foods is currently at a low rate, so any negative effects of genetically modified foods would be felt long after the governments who banned them had retired. As a result, citizen groups who are against the use of genetically modified crops are preventing governments from funding research which could ultimately help mankind. Just as important, governments who base their decision on the short-term, such as the political or monetary system, will be less able to adapt their policies as new information becomes available. Rather than basing their decisions on reason, these governments will instead be swayed by popular opinion

As a result, governments which base their decisions on the short-term, such as the political or monetary system, should be the least likely ones to fund research with dangerous consequences. However, governments which are open to new ideas, such as democracies, should fund more research with negative potential consequences. For instance, a democratic government would be able to fund research into genetically modified crops, but would have to listen to its constituents before taking any action. While a democratic government might eventually ban the cultivation of genetically modified crops, it would have to do so only after considering the possible consequences of the ban

Another important factor which should be considered is the general attitude towards risk in society. Because some research can have disastrous consequences, governments which fund this research may run the risk of antagonizing the general population. For instance, the government of the United Kingdom is funding research into the potential health effects of genetically modified foods. As a result of this research, UK citizens have become hostile towards the genetically modified foods, fearing that they will have negative health effects. As a result, the UK government has become increasingly unwilling to fund research into genetically modified foods, fearing that its funding could cause a backlash. If the governments of the world were to listen to the cries of their citizens and refrain from funding dangerous research, the human race would be greatly harmed. To combat this, governments should fund research on subjects which the general population is in favor of. Governments should also ensure that funding for research is distributed fairly, so that citizens are not disproportionately affected by certain projects.