The frog on a dissection table approach to software development seems like it is probably a primary cause of incidents involving lost surgical tools in production.
In traditional development you didn't have one organ in a harness, then 3 organs in a harness, etc, having modified them to have no thickness that could hide something from a unit test. That's as different from the functioning frog as the dissected one.
There are endless permutations that are possible in this modern ideal that are all correct for some or all testing purposes, during all test runs, and in every system the average project participant will ever see up close.
They are wrong in production, vastly outnumber correct production configurations, and confuse any discussions about the attempt to port things to production as they are more canonical to the group than production itself.
That's not to say there aren't ways to do this style of multiple test types correctly, only that I think it was done with more care at each level instead of less as layered redundancy needs particular properties or you get holes that all line up, configuration for tests that make it to production, etc.
