fMRI can track oxygenation changes, and indirectly where the blood flow is, or isn't, and perhaps some ideas on where to get it.

All to say, this application might not fall in the 40%.

I just find articles like these can't help but feel like they have an agenda to undermine something instead of simply acknowledge the kinds of things it is and isn't working for.

There's no doubt these researchers have found something, but the need for sensationalistic headlines is well known in academia as well.

Sometimes it's noticeable where the research is specific in scope, but the findings are more general and broad.