The one thing I always remembered throughout my many years as a prosecutor and as a judge is that the first question is, is it relevant? It's amazing how many questions that answers: is it relevant? Someone would have to convince me, if I were the judge, why it is relevant to consider what the technique is. What is it that you're disputing about this? Is it the volume, or...? I don't see how the technique really matters. I probably would rule it inadmissible as being irrelevant, in that the technique cannot be helpful to the accused in forwarding his case.
I agree with the concern. I just don't have a simple answer.