Regarding diarrhetic lecture titles

In my professional capacity as campus calendar editor, I come across some wacky titles for the hundreds of exhibits, roundtables, lectures and other events on campus. With this experience I've become more sensitive to the many pitfalls involved in composing a title, and I have to say that, in spite of the obvious overload of scientific brainpower on this campus, scientists offering public lectures around here are far and away the most slapdash composers of titles for their talks. In support of this contention I submit to you Exhibit A, the title of an upcoming talk by one Nicholas Magnus of Eli Lilly (private sector, no less!). The talk is titled as follows:

"Development of a Mild Beta-Ketonitrile Knorr Reaction to Afford an AMPA Potentiator and Enantioselective Aryl Transfer Process Gives Access to mGlu2 Receptor Potentiators"

I submit that scientists tend to care so little about the efficient communication of their work that, when it comes to deciding on a title for their lecture, they invariably choo0se either, 1) the first sentence of the abstract; 2) the first sentence of the paper; or 3) the last sentence of the paper. Anything along the lines of, you know, reworking and condensing the central point by means of some principles of linguistic efficiency is, apparently, strictly verboten. Scientists have more important matters to attend to than communication.