I'll have to agree with Odie. A good part of the time in my engineering career, I was involved with various types of qualification testing programs including writing test plans and specifications and there are two definite things that can be said regarding tests that attempt to quantify how well something will perform once it gets in the hands of the user: The test methods are very rigorous structured processes that attempt to eliminate unknown variables and minimize uncertainties in the conduct of the tests -- and, because of that ... The tests do not reflect reality in the way that something is actually used, but instead provide a quantifiable benchmark for the engineers and scientists designing a system. Testing methods are not for the user community -- they are for the designers. Since you mentioned cutlery, the tests help refine manufacturing processes and selection of materials to achieve some specific level of performance. Presumably this translates to some degree into performance in the wild once the product is in the hands of the customer, but the customer isn't using the cutlery to conduct engineering tests -- what they are doing is using the cutlery in real world conditions where there is not somebody with a clipboard and wearing a white lab coat directing how the cutlery is being used. Because of this unending list of undefined parameters when used in the field, any comparison to the results of rigorously controlled tests becomes somewhat anecdotal to real world application. Standardized testing methods has not led to things becoming cut and dried (excuse the pun) in the cutlery industry as far as the user is concerned. If it were, there would be no question about which particular product is best for some task regardless of the user's methods of using the product.