What if a lossless codec were included in the test - and it came in dead last?
I still don't understand why a lossless codec must even be considered in a survey that is comparing lossy codecs. A file compressed with a lossless codec will be indistinguishable from the uncompressed original audio files (which I assume he included for comparison, else it's a rotten test).

What I can't seem to find out is if the original file was both supplied for comparison as well as made part of the double blind test. That would be the best methodology in my opinion.