I'll be taking the exam in 2 weeks. Please leave some feedback; I'd appreciate it!
Scientific research should be carried out and controlled by the governments rather than private companies.
It is argued that the governments should be responsible for conducting scientific studies instead of private companies. To a certain extent, I think private companies are capable of carrying out their own investigation. However, I agree that it could be more beneficial if the states are in charge of organizing those research.
From a business perspective, private companies have more motivation to invest in their research. They need evidence to show that their products or interventions could bring out the desired effects. The significant results from the company's findings could be the selling points of their products, which bring great profits for the company. As a result, private companies could gather a large amount of data, but they could also manipulate the data to benefit themselves. For example, a pharmaceutical company studying the effectiveness of the newly invented drug would never want to disseminate the results of their study if that drug does not work. They could possibly adjust the findings to make them more favorable.
As there is a considerable risk of bias from private companies' research, I think the data quality could be better assured if the governments initiate those research. The states have fewer conflicts of interest that individual company. However, the governments have many focuses including economics, society, health, environment and more. If the research interest is not within the authorities' top priorities, it would take a long time for the research proposal to be approved and implemented. But once the researches are conducted, the findings will bring great benefits for the community and will help to inform the development of policy.
In conclusion, I believe that government-sponsored scientific studies, rather than those conducted by private companies, can better ensure the quality of evidence and better inform policy-makers.
Scientific research should be carried out and controlled by the governments rather than private companies.
Do you agree or disagree?
It is argued that the governments should be responsible for conducting scientific studies instead of private companies. To a certain extent, I think private companies are capable of carrying out their own investigation. However, I agree that it could be more beneficial if the states are in charge of organizing those research.
From a business perspective, private companies have more motivation to invest in their research. They need evidence to show that their products or interventions could bring out the desired effects. The significant results from the company's findings could be the selling points of their products, which bring great profits for the company. As a result, private companies could gather a large amount of data, but they could also manipulate the data to benefit themselves. For example, a pharmaceutical company studying the effectiveness of the newly invented drug would never want to disseminate the results of their study if that drug does not work. They could possibly adjust the findings to make them more favorable.
As there is a considerable risk of bias from private companies' research, I think the data quality could be better assured if the governments initiate those research. The states have fewer conflicts of interest that individual company. However, the governments have many focuses including economics, society, health, environment and more. If the research interest is not within the authorities' top priorities, it would take a long time for the research proposal to be approved and implemented. But once the researches are conducted, the findings will bring great benefits for the community and will help to inform the development of policy.
In conclusion, I believe that government-sponsored scientific studies, rather than those conducted by private companies, can better ensure the quality of evidence and better inform policy-makers.