From a utilitarian point of view research is of benefit to the future population and so (if considering future generations) performing it would take precedent over some discomfort.
However some research is avoided because it is taboo (and you can't get funding so easily) but should it be?
For example: Different races have evolved clear physical differences (nose shape, skin colour, average height..etc) and it would be odd to assume the differences are only skin deep but people are less likely to research such things because of racist connotations.
I don't want the above example to define the answers so other topics include: Anything that implies less free will (effects of advertising etc), determining factors in sexuality, anything seen as 'crackpot' ideas (like perhaps there is an unknown creature in loch ness or perhaps there is a bigfoot.
The question is: Some research is avoided because it goes against social norms. Ethically should we accept this slight set back in these areas of research or should more effort be made to support them?