Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Time to redefine normal body temperature? (2020)

health.harvard.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 148 posts

Re: Time to redefine normal body temperature? (2020)

#111

Post by cesarb »

ls15 wrote: post #90
ghshephard wrote: post #12

As someone who has always been 96.5/35.8 - I will say that having a higher body temperature being the standard works out well when you come running in flushed to your check-in gate at the airport, and they take your body temperature (Covid thing) - and you still come in well under the acceptable range.

During the pandemic, some shopping centers in my area started to measure wrist temperatures. Once, my wrist was still cold from winter temperatures outside: "28.5, ok, next"

> During the pandemic, some shopping centers in my area started to measure wrist temperatures.

They were supposed to measure your forehead temperature with that infrared thermometer. But due to some insane rumor spread around the net about these thermometers somehow hurting the pineal gland or something like that, everyone starting measuring on the wrist, even though it's way less accurate.

Re: Time to redefine normal body temperature? (2020)

#112

Post by rvbissell »

zoklet-enjoyer wrote: post #32

I heard about this on a podcast but don't remember which podcast it was on. More fungal infections possibly because body temperatures are decreasing. https://www.wired.com/story/fungi-climate-change-medicine-he...

Radiolab. One of their best episodes, IMO.

https://radiolab.org/episodes/fungus-amungus

Re: Time to redefine normal body temperature? (2020)

#113

Post by mantas »

romwell wrote: post #103
mantas wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

36.9 with a sad face would do.. I mean mercury is past 9 mark so it's pretty much 37, right?

Being friends with the household cat was very important for such strategies ;)

Graphite is tasty though

Re: Time to redefine normal body temperature? (2020)

#114

Post by _yb2s »

nano9 wrote: post #38

> [One key possibility] ... Lower metabolic rate: One of the biggest determinants of body temperature is your metabolic rate. Like a car engine that’s idling, your body expends energy just keeping things going, and that generates heat. A lower metabolic rate in modern times could be due to higher body mass (some studies link this with lower metabolic rate), or better medical treatments, preventive measures, and overa…

This is a really important aspect here. I am skeptical of efforts to lower the standard human body temp, because it seems to me like normalizing hypothyroidism and other metabolic disorders that, if taken seriously and treated would improve energy levels and quality of life.

Re: Time to redefine normal body temperature? (2020)

#115

Post by _yb2s »

Analogbullfrog wrote: post #89
nano9 wrote: post #38

> [One key possibility] ... Lower metabolic rate: One of the biggest determinants of body temperature is your metabolic rate. Like a car engine that’s idling, your body expends energy just keeping things going, and that generates heat. A lower metabolic rate in modern times could be due to higher body mass (some studies link this with lower metabolic rate), or better medical treatments, preventive measures, and overa…

That’s an interesting idea, although overweight people actually have faster metabolisms by virtue of being bigger.

They burn more calories overall, but tend to have a lower resting metabolism per body weight, which is specifically what lower metabolism means in this context.

Re: Time to redefine normal body temperature? (2020)

#116

Post by xeromal »

paulpauper wrote: post #31

Normal body temperature seems to be falling over time. An analysis of 20 studies between 1935 and 1999 found that the average oral temperature was 97.5˚ F. And a 2017 study of more than 35,000 people found an average body temperature of 97.9˚ F. I wonder if this can explain rising worldwide rates of obesity.

It's mentioned in the article that being overwhere is a potential explanation. Hard work surely increases your body temperature.

Re: Time to redefine normal body temperature? (2020)

#117

Post by ncallaway »

Jakob wrote: post #19
ncallaway wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought the same, so I tried to find Wunderlich. The only source I could find ( https://www.google.com/books/edition/_/3-wHAAAAIAAJ?hl=en&gb... ) seems to have Wunderlich reporting "98.6F", and then converting to Celsius: > The average normal temperature of the healthy human body in its interior, or in carefully covered situations on its surface, varies, according to the plan of measurement from 98.6° to 99.5° Fahr…

That is a translation artifact. The German original cites 37-37.5 degrees Celsius on average: https://archive.org/details/dasverhaltender00wundgoog/page/n...

Gah! Of course Wunderlich didn't write the original in English, and I should've looked for the original in German.

I'm a little surprised and disappointed that the translation also translates the units, though. That seems to be stepping just outside the bounds of what I would want translated (at least, in the context of a medical journal or scientific writing).

Thanks for that correction!

Re: Time to redefine normal body temperature? (2020)

#118

Post by nradov »

cesarb wrote: post #111
ls15 wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

During the pandemic, some shopping centers in my area started to measure wrist temperatures. Once, my wrist was still cold from winter temperatures outside: "28.5, ok, next"

> During the pandemic, some shopping centers in my area started to measure wrist temperatures. They were supposed to measure your forehead temperature with that infrared thermometer. But due to some insane rumor spread around the net about these thermometers somehow hurting the pineal gland or something like that, everyone starting measuring on the wrist, even though it's way less accurate.

It was always completely pointless pandemic theater regardless of the measurement technique.

Re: Time to redefine normal body temperature? (2020)

#119

Post by syrrim »

antiatheist wrote: post #36
ncallaway wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought the same, so I tried to find Wunderlich. The only source I could find ( https://www.google.com/books/edition/_/3-wHAAAAIAAJ?hl=en&gb... ) seems to have Wunderlich reporting "98.6F", and then converting to Celsius: > The average normal temperature of the healthy human body in its interior, or in carefully covered situations on its surface, varies, according to the plan of measurement from 98.6° to 99.5° Fahr…

Interesting that the original german text uses Celsius as the primary measurement, and provides conversions in Rankine. No mention of Fahrenheit. Funny that people argue over this and some guy named Wunderlich who measured a bunch of asses. Did he write that translation or is Google Books fake news?

It's obviously not rankine, seeing as it gives a conversion of ~30R = ~40C. Looks like its actually Reaumur: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/R%C3%A9aumur_scale

Re: Time to redefine normal body temperature? (2020)

#120

Post by mackman »

In the afternoon my son’s temperature is closer to 99.5. Of course I never measured it unless I thought he was sick and confirmation bias led me to believe he was feverish. I finally started checking it in the afternoon when he seemed well and realized he was just always warm in the afternoon and all that worrying about his “fever” was pointless.
Post reply on HN