Mine, too. That is a good example of greed corrupting research. Other things corrupt research too, such as a desire to protect religious ideas. This past century research into macromolecules was held back, because some researchers refused to believe that a macromolecule could be produced without a hidden living principle from an animal or plant. This was a groundless assertion and proved to be so, as today we readily use plastics made with chemicals only. Scientific process was hindered but not stopped, however the discovery of macromolecular technology didn't directly threaten the jobs of ministers. It therefore was overturned by a few researchers ignoring and stretching past it to see what was possible. Creationism is another kind of objection altogether, since ministers have the (false) perception that their jobs are threatened by evolution and the idea of natural selection making people.
I googled "macromolecules opposition" and the only page that I found was
https://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/education/whatischemistry/landmarks/staudingerpolymerscience.html wherein we read:
In 1920, Hermann Staudinger, then professor of organic chemistry at the Eigenössische Technische Hochschule in Zurich, created a stir in the international chemical community when he postulated that materials such as natural rubber have very high molecular weights....his new concept, referred to as "macromolecules" by Staudinger in 1922, covered both synthetic and natural polymers and was the key to a wide range of modern polymeric materials and innovative applications. Today, the molecular architectures of synthetic polymers and biopolymers are tailored with high precision to meet the demands of modern technology. The products of polymer chemistry are diverse, from food packaging, textile fibers, auto parts and toys, to membranes for water desalination, carriers used in controlled drug release and biopolymers for tissue engineering....
Despite the impressive experimental evidence, Staudinger continued to encounter very strong opposition
from leading organic chemists for nearly two decades. For instance, Heinrich Wieland, 1927 Nobel laureate in chemistry, wrote to Staudinger, "Dear colleague, drop the idea of large molecules; organic molecules with a molecular weight higher than 5000 do not exist. Purify your products, such as rubber, then they will crystallize and prove to be low molecular compounds!"
------------------------
So you see, the opposition to macromolecules seems to have come from
scientists rather than from
ministers.
