On the morning of 6th August 1945, Hiroshima, a Japanese city, was completely demolished by an atomic bomb. The trace of humanity was eradicated in Hiroshima, and only smithereens and debris of buildings were leftover. It was an absolute calamity. Yet, many people hold a positive outlook on various forms of scientific research. Indeed, science research has enabled immense innovation and improvement in convenience today. For instance, thanks to scientific research, the society with advanced internet technology, faster and efficient trasportation, medicine technologies for major diseases, is all available. According to the NIH (National Institutes of Health), research conducted for the purpose of contributing towards science by the systematic collection, interpretation, and evaluation of data is defined as a scientific research. However, not all scientific research gives rise to positive outcomes. As manifested in the case of hiroshima above, scientific research can not only be used to improve human life but can also be used to destroy it.  

ABC (Atomic, Biological, Chemical) weapons and further science domains are one of the cases when science research and technology was exploited to take away thousands of lives. However, science research is not only confined in the fields of weaponry. Science is ubiquitous in every individual’s lives, and therefore has significant implications towards everyone. Despite the importance of scientific research in advancing knowledge and technology, the ethical considerations in scientific research outweigh them in significance. This is because scientific research is progressing into riskier areas. Although some research de facto had barely any negative impacts, there was a low probability of extreme implications from occurring, such as generation of black holes, ignition of the atmosphere, and a creation of a quark matter that could’ve absorbed anything adjacent to it. Even if there are extremely low probability of these extreme case scenarios from occuring, it is necessary for people to be aware of these risks and view scientific research with a critical outlook. While scientific research is essential for progress, there are certain types of research that raise ethical concerns and may warrant consideration for regulation or prohibition. 

Three major ethical considerations stand out in scientific research: human experimentation, animal experimentation, and dual-use research. It is now commonplace fo scientific research to be conducted with human subjects. Primary concern regarding human testing is the high risk procedures targeted at the underprivileged. To elaborate, since people who are living a stable life would not really want any rewards from participating in an experiment which can bring negative impacts to their health to themselves, the experiments mainly targets the underprivileged, who are desperate. Because of this, when an experiment is suggested for them, they usually have no choice but to join, due to the fact that they are desperate to survive with the resources provided by the researchers. When there are any negative consequences from being experimented, the unprivileged will eventually have to live their rest of their lives with a handicap. In other words, this is an exploitation of a  loophole to the system of human experimentation, and these issues should be addressed with a policy. An effective policy will be suggested in seubsequent paragraphs. 

Additionally, numerous ethical concerns surround animal experimentation. Despite the tangible benefits that animal experimentation occasionally have, it causes extreme distress and suffering for the animal, as animal experimentation often treat animals as objects, neglecting their welfare. Moreover, after all these horrible treatments to animals, it is overall meaningless because of the physiological and anatomical difference between humans and animals, in conjunction with tight control variables that is not manifested in the complexity and variation seen in human population and diseases. To illustrate, as a result, results of animal testing for researching major diseases such as HIV/AIDS, Alzheimer’s disease, cancer, etc. were completely not useful in its medicine development. This directly manifests the inefficiency of animal experimentation, and how unethical it is. 

Furthermore, dual-use research also gives rise to ethical concerns. According to Texas A&M University Division of Research, dual-use research refers to research conducted for legitimate purposes where the generated knowledge, information, technologies, and products which could be utilized for both benevolent and harmful purposes. It is quite hard to distinguish whether countries or institutes are conducting a dual-use research for benevolent or harmful purposes, and thus dual-use research involves potential political issues and potential of abusing it. To illustrate, there is a high risk of these research being conducted to develop a weaponry, especially for ABC weapons that can be used for war. In fact, some researchers allege that COVID-19 was actually a chemical weapon that was under development in Wuhan, and this generation has experienced how significant COVID was to lock us up for nearly 3 years. Considering this, and considering that technology is continuing to develop at a blistering pace, when another weapon is leaked to the world, its implications can be significantly detrimental, even more than COVID has done to this generation. Additionally, if another pandemic like COVID won’t consider people enough, there are further extreme consequences of duel-use technologies. For instance, the development of nuclear weapons, resulted from large-scale investments in nuclear power plants, may give rise to rogue states like DPRK, where nuclear weapons are being developed in the intention of attacking other countries. If this continues and exacerbates, a nuclear war will eventually occur, which would simply terminate humanity. Thus, it is essential to have a firm policy or a treaty that can effectively address these issues. 

In order to mitigate the negative implications and maximize the positive impacts brought by scientific experiments, it is crucial to have a clear and specific guideline to filter out certain types of research that raise ethical concerns and may warrant consideration for regulation or prohibition. In my opinion, GSRI (Global Scientific Research Index) should be established, an index where all factors of a scientific experiment can be displayed, and they will be the standards for the experiment’s execution status. Specifically, this index will decide whether the experiment will be directly prohibited, allowed, executed with some adjustments, or executed with supervision of external organizations. 

The index value would be based on these factors: the balance between risks and benefits, and the solutions for resolving events provoked by its risks, potential of dual-use research, and its contribution to society. These information will be collected through a survey where all members of the experiment answer, as well as other scientists from prestigious institutes and universities in order to prevent any false information being inputted into the survey. Even if this does not solve the issue of misinformation, there will be a huge sanction for any misinformation written in the survey, which can ensure that the information inputted to the survey is accurate. 

Based on these information from the survey, the GSRI board will check the scientific research altogether, and have an index point for the scientific research. They will go through similar guidelines to give the experiment an adequate rate. The average rate by the board members will be the official GSRI for a scientific research, and this index will decide whether the experiment will be directly objected or allowed, or executed along with the supervision of external organizations. The organization of GSRI will operate as a global government for scientific research under the vision of pursuing execution of adequate experiments that does not surpass any standards for implications on humans, ecosystem, economy, or any other sectors of the society. 

In conclusion, due to the ambivalence of scientific research, while it should be permitted to a certain extent, it should be balanced out with regulation. I strongly believe in both the benefits and the serious risks that it pose to the society, and in order to maximize its benefits and discard the negatives, I believe that GSRI is an outstanding solution to mitigate any risks, ethical issues, and the potential of dual-use research.