  In the history of quantum physics several no-go theorems have been proved,
and many of them have played a central role in the development of the theory,
such as Bell's or the Kochen-Specker theorem. A recent paper by F. Laudisa has
raised reasonable doubts concerning the strategy followed in proving some of
these results, since they rely on the standard framework of quantum mechanics,
a theory that presents several ontological problems. The aim of this paper is
twofold: on the one hand, I intend to reinforce Laudisa's methodological point
by critically discussing Malament's theorem in the context of the philosophical
foundation of Quantum Field Theory; secondly, I rehabilitate Gisin's theorem
showing that Laudisa's concerns do not apply to it.
