Governments should place few if any restrictions on scientific research and development

Science is the catalyst for mankind’s progress. It has found the explanation of natural events and processes that were previously arcane to humans, treatments for almost all types of diseases and disorders, ways to ameliorate people’s lives by inventing electricity and technologies, etc. However, does this mean that waiving rigorous constraints on scientific research and development would lead to even greater progress? While I do concede that such a practice may reveal more opportunities to human beings and lead them to prosperity, I mostly disagree with this assertion for two reasons.
To begin, although unethical scientific experimentations on humans require sacrifice and may be immoral, they might be very efficient to investigate the effects of certain detrimental substances or noxious chemicals on the human body and find ways to eliminate unwanted consequences they cause. For instance, in the late 19th century, numerous clandestine experiments were performed in the USA: injection of toxic chemicals to test subjects, exposure of people to biological and chemical substances, human radiation experiments, experimentations on the brain and nerves, etc. Even though such illicit activities were banned, they had significantly contributed to the prosperity of medicine and had facilitated the saving much more lives. In other words, the refusal of moral and legal restrictions helped the scholars to effectively observe and study the direct impact of deleterious substances on the human organism and make great progress in the field of medicine.
On the other hand, if authorities provided such an opportunity to scientists, their research works and progress in certain fields, namely the nuclear science field, would probably lead to severe consequences in the form of the demise of a huge number of people. Take, for example, the period in the 20th century when nuclear engineers were allowed to research and design devastating nuclear weapons. Great progress has been made in this area; however, thousands of residents of Hiroshima and Nagasaki cities perished in excruciating pain as a result. Thus, if governments remove restrictions on researching this domain and inventing nuclear weapons, the events that happened in Japan during World War II may be repeated in other parts of the world, especially given the precarious state of the politics between nations today.
Additionally, science and development can cause irreparable damage to the environment without any control. The owners of factories and enterprises do not always dispose of refuse reasonably if there are no strict restrictions related to this, resulting in pollution of air, water, or soil. As a result, the contaminants that these natural resources contain could lead to the spread of various human diseases. To illustrate, during the period between the 1950s and the 1960s, Minamata disease, which is caused by the daily consumption of fish poisoned with methylmercury, occurred in Japan. The local factories situated near water sources used to release a vast amount of that toxic chemicals into the water, contaminating the inhabitants of the lakes. Minamata disease not only has taken many lives among residents but also has caused conflicts in the local community and has left a large variety of social and political issues.
To conclude, placing restrictions on scientific research and development is a complex topic with many valid arguments on each side. While it can be true that even the most amoral and uncontrolled scientific experiments in certain fields could lead to the advancement and prosperity of that field, without any rigorous limits, science and development could be destructive and baneful to mankind, jeopardizing the lives of a huge number of people.