Accurately measured, maybe; but how can they be the true (actual, real world, "as they would be in use") leakage currents if the kit being tested is not energised by the mains?
Don't get me wrong, I'm a supporter of 62353 in general, but I can't help but think that it's a bit of a "missed opportunity". In short, there's probably too much "mix 'n' match" (or "take your pick") in there for many of the biomeds I have come across; most of whom seemed to prefer a "this is what you do" approach.
I cite your final revelation as an example ... so, even after forty-odd years of EST Standards, we still can't agree on the test current. Let's plumb for 10 Amps and be done with it!
Perhaps next time around we can get the Committee(s) to consider a "62353-Lite" ... one that ditches the possible confusion (complications) of the Alternative and Differential* Methods, and declares what the PEC test current should be.
*
When would (could) you use it? It's "quick and easy", and measures total leakage current - but can't accurately measure low values of leakage (which is, after all, what we're hoping for)!
