Ideally, yes. Practically though, there could be problems if the research interferes with a big industry, or disrupts 'well established practices'. Or if it da

Ideally, yes. Practically though, there could be problems if the research interferes with a big industry, or disrupts 'well established practices'. Or if it damages the professional reputations of important people, or clashes with 'belief perseverance', or makes powerful people look bad, or makes the university likely to lose funding, or goes against the current cancellation third rail, etc, etc. There's no shortage of historical examples: tobacco health research, Semmelweis, plate tectonics (!), lockdown cost benefit analyses, etc. There was very little 'science' in outlawing cannabis research for decades. Same goes for MDMA, LSD, psilocybin, etc, all with massive therapeutic potential that has been held back for decades by politics & industry.