lossy test conclusions?

found via the Hydrogen Audio [http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/] forums: The writer of this blog entry [http://blog.szynalski.com/2009/07/27/should-we-care-about-abx-test-results/] makes an interesting point regarding the double blind ABX listening test [http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=16295]. Essentially what they're getting it is that the test evaluates what we hear, not necessarily the worth of the compression. My personal concern is that if we bow to these tests that determine users don't hear the difference between lossly and lossless audio formats (MP3 vs WAV, for example) some might use that to argue that, aside from initial recording/mastering, lossless audio is unnecessary - perhaps even for long term archival storage. The writer, I think, makes a valid point in that just because we don't hear the difference, that doesn't mean it can't affect us. Given that lossy audio - and even things like losless format 16-bit/44.1 khz audio - achieves some of its size compression via tapering/rejection of high, "inaudible" frequencies it might be interesting to consider the post alongside this article: Inaudible High-Frequency Sounds Affect Brain Activity: Hypersonic Effect [http://jn.physiology.org/cgi/content/full/83/6/3548] J Neurophysiol. 2000 Jun;83(6):3548-58.