It is widely recognized that the majority of scientific research is being funded and carried out by the private sector instead of the government. While this has admittedly certain drawbacks, I would argue that these are overshadowed by the benefits.
On the one hand, opponents of private companies assuming scientific research might emphasize that research can be abused. For example, certain organizations can develop nuclear weapons to either increase their power or profiteer from arms trade. Not only would this jeopardize the local community but it might also pose a threat to the safety of the entire world. However, this fear is misplaced, as even when companies are self-funding scientific studies, their every conduct will still be under government control. This supervision can ensure that scientific research is not illegal or harmful to the public.
Furthermore, letting private firms finance most science-related research can be economically advantageous. Given that undertaking particular research in this field often requires a colossal amount of money, if the state fully backed all scientific studies, this could take a toll on their budgets. This is particularly true in developing countries like Vietnam, where the national coffers are often meager, and overspending on science would lead to a dearth of funding for other important sectors like transportation. This example is a testament to the economic benefits to/for the government when most scientific studies are entrusted to the private sector.
In conclusion, despite certain latent fears, I would contend that allowing private organizations to subsidize and perform the bulk of scientific research can confer greater benefits.