If we need to remind researchers drawing conclusions in their studies, "before reporting how effective something is, you have to first attempt to use it" then I'm afraid we are doomed, and live in a world full of journalistic/scientific idiots.

If anyone has ever wondered if a handgun left in their pack, out of sight, untouched, is effective against bears ... well, I guess we know the answer to that now. I hope they didn't spend too much money on the research to come up with their conclusion. "Hey, look what I determined. This handgun didn't do diddly-squat. We'd better report it." I'd be rooting for the bear in that study.

It's nice that your friend published his article to set the other researcher-morons straight, but it's very sad that he had to in the first place.