Pretty much, it also depends on what you conclude, not simply what is done, the Fulcum IID contains a pretty large food prep section and its ends with :
"Thus in short, as long as it is properly sharpened, the Fulcrum IID can cut meats, breads, and soft fruits, but can only crudely chunk up thick vegetables and takes a lot of force and will crack them rather than make thin slices."
The work just quantifies this in a little detail. Now of course if the summary was :
"The Fulcrum IID does poorly on food prep, this is a horrible offering by ER, someone needs to teach them how to grind."
There would be reason to argue, because the knife isn't designed to be a good kitchen knife so it should not be heavily critized for its performance there. The main focus should obviously be can it handle very heavy work and then outline the cutting ability, as anything can be tough if you don't care how it cuts.
As well of course there is a huge cross over to other media, it isn't like a knife will cut poorly on binding vegetables but then glide through thick ropes, cardboards, woods, and such with ease. Yes there are various differences such as recurves on various media or just raw size/weight of a knife but in general there are also broad patterns of performance based on cross section.
Everyone has to make a personal decision on toughness vs cutting ability, some knives go more one way than the other, this isn't really good or bad in general, the maker just needs to be clear on the performance so the users can decide what is the best knife for them. I do a lot of work in general, pretty much whatever is at hand with whatever knife I have at hand, the work done in the reviews is as much for me to learn about knives as it is to "review" the knife.
-Cliff