Many times it requires years to build a laboratory which can even begin to replicate the work of an established operation.

And sometimes it is impossible to solve a difficult problem using the first lab one builds in pursuit of that concept.

In these cases the true type of laboratory needed only comes within focus after completing the first attempt by the book and having it prove inadequate.

Proving things is difficult not only in the laboratory, but in hard science it still usually has to be possible to fully support your findings, especially if you are overturning the status quo in some way. That still doesn't require findings to actually be reproduced in a separate lab if the original researchers can demonstrate satisfactory proof in their own unique lab. This may require outside materials or data sets to be satisfactory. Science is not easy.

I think all kinds of scientists should be supported in all kinds of ways.

Fundamentally, there are simply some scientists without peers, always have been.

For unique breakthroughs this might be a most likely source, so they should be leveraged by capitalists using terms without peer.