All aspects of a functional object should be given equal consideration when planning and carrying out its treatment. Restoration to functioning condition should not be considered unless an extremely important historic, technical, or aesthetic quality can only be determined through the actual operation of the artefact and this information cannot be gained in any other manner. If an organ conservator is working to an accepted code of ethics then he will obviously need to use the methods, techniques, and materials that suit. The woodworm problem is just one example. If you pour a liquid-based chemical over the timber it will saturate the porous fibres and leave a residue.
Alternatives exist, such as the use of gas.
Some use carbon dioxide, others use nitrogen, others methyl bromide. The use of epoxy resin or other hardeners to strengthen or augment worm-eaten timber can not be justified. All you are doing is destroying original information about the component and therefore the integrity of the instrument. Instead you can either destroy the insects and store the object, with documentation, or simply seal it is a plastic bag and store it. A new replacement will do the job better, and when better conservation techniques are developed the original can be re-used.