--it would be interesting to know exactly what the average nerve fiber densities are from each of the samples that were taken, and what percentiles compared to "normals" they fall into.

As the other thread Mrs. D refers to you indicates, there are some inherent measuring biases in the diagnostic determination of "small fiber neuropathy", in that, according to the original protocols developed at Johns Hopkins, the density levels are not labeled definite neuropathy unless they are below the 5th percentile or above the 95th percentile (and usually it's the former). So you could even have a reading in the 6th percentile and the lab report would not likely come back with a specific neuropathy diagnosis.

I've made comments in the other thread about how the weakness of this rubric is that as a snapshot in time one does not know how one's current average intraepidermal nerve fiber density compares with what one had before symptoms, as no one goes for this test without symptoms. People do "start out" at widely varied levels. This is why part of the report is also supposed to indicate the condition of the nerve fibers as perceived under electron microscopy--are they swollen, frayed, excessively branched, etc.