Obviously an affordable, easily reproducible experiment designed to scientifically demonstrate the effect(s) wouldn't have to be a product, only to be able to run "loud and clear" enough, without being constrained by practicality, long-term reliability, safety, and so on. If it can also effectively perform useful work that would be a nice bonus, but not required.
Investors, regulations, NDAs, products and the like are terms related to marketing, and it's where the poll gets weird. If the various entities presented have a vested interest in obfuscating the process behind how to make the reaction work, either they shouldn't have been listed or the poll shouldn't have been defined as being about the science.
Just my 2c, though.