As both the neurometer and the electrodermometer are instruments which are designed to find the idiosyncracies of pathological reflexes on the surface of the body using special electrical sknpoint on the surface of the body as a reference, both give a certain amount of voltage and read the amount of the value of the electrical current and according to the largeness or smallness of that value measure the so-called electrical resistance. The substance of these readings are however by no means the same.
In other words, whereas the neurometer measures the resistance in real number parts of the peripheral impedance, the electrodermometer measures the complete impedance including imaginary number parts.
Therefore as physical information on the periphery of the body measured by the two instruments is different, the physiological and pathological meanings which are obtained from these readings are not the same and it must be assumed that the two have independent diagnostic characteristics.
In order to verify this using both instruments we took readings of the electrical current at the same 12 points. Results of examination of the relationship between the 2 sets of readings revealed that the level of correlation was extremely low and that there was almost no relation between the numerical values of the two.
These facts indicate, as we assumed theoretically, that the physiological-pathological characteristics of the special peripheral points which both instruments use as a reference are not identical. It can be stated that they have their own independent substance.
From the above research experience then it can be theoretically stated that in the future, in measuring the impedance on the body's surface, except when using the neurometer, it is necessary to limit as much as possible the contribution of the R factors, to limit study of the pure impedance factors and pathological factors to the electrostatic polarization of the special points on the surface of the body.