- Joined
- Jun 2, 2003
- Messages
- 23,591
102°F is not a high fever. 104°F (40°C) and up is high.
sweat out a cold - is it a fact or myth?
- Thread starter turbomazda
- Start date
- Status
Depends on the person. At anything above 100f I'm in severe pain, 102f I become delirious. At 104f I would be in a coma, if I lived. My normal body temp. is 97.8f.
You need a new thermostat, Oldmope !! Yours is stuck open..
oldmoparguy thats odd because i have the opposite problem. my normal body temp is like 99.4
anyways i was thinking about this fever topic and i got to thinking if being overheated was beneficial then why have i never seen a doctor (or anyone really) recomend to sick people that they should hit the hot tub, jacuzzi, sauna, hot shower, etc. no one ever recomends that as a treatment.
just stupid things like eating chicken soup.
anyways i was thinking about this fever topic and i got to thinking if being overheated was beneficial then why have i never seen a doctor (or anyone really) recomend to sick people that they should hit the hot tub, jacuzzi, sauna, hot shower, etc. no one ever recomends that as a treatment.
just stupid things like eating chicken soup.
My normal body temp is 96.8 and I have a crazy high metabolism...go figure.
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2003
- Messages
- 23,591
My normal body temp is a pretty low 97.6°F (36.4°C) and I begin seeing and hearing things at about 105°F (40.6°C). At over 104°F (40°C) I will be reaching for an antipyretic and cold, wet towels (for leg wraps). As Oldmoparguy1 said, everyone is different.
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,798
Quote:
A fever is nothing but a symptom of an immune response. As such, the fever itself isn't what helps fight off anything, but it shows the immune system is responding to an infection (viral or bacterial). Obviously a high a fever can be dangerous and is also an excessive burden on the body (cardovascular system. A moderate fever is just fine with your average viral cold infection. A fever which is not accompanied by sweating can be very dangerous. Remaining hydrated is of course essential essential.
Not sure what the original poster meant by "sweating out a cold." Hitting the tracks or the pool isn't going to work well for most folks.
Perhaps it would be more correctly stated that treating a fever inhibits the natural immunes system's response to fight the infection.
A fever doesn't inhibit the immune system, a fever is good for your immune system. It boosts white blood cell count and white blood cells actually work better when you have a fever. Not to mention antibody levels are also raised when you have a fever. A fever helps your body to fight off infection and viruses, you shouldn't do something about it unless it is very high.
One thing for very new parents. If an infant less than 3 months old has a fever he/she needs to go to the emergency room immediately bc it probably signals a massive infection (that from my daughter the nurse)
JHZR2
Staff member
To one extent, think ahhrenius, and the activation energy of most chemical reactions - the higher the temperature, the faster the kinetics... that is good.
But I suppose there is a balance between inter-cellular transport, and the kinetics of metabolism. Id venture to guess that besides negatives such as break down of cell components, walls, etc., there is an issue where when metabolism kinetics get too high, one's cells literally fester in their own garbage, and thus create a toxic environment for themselves, killing them selves effectively.
Just my guess why too high a fever is bad...
Ditto for too low a temperature, the reaction rates are not sustaining for the processes necessary for human life.
JMH
But I suppose there is a balance between inter-cellular transport, and the kinetics of metabolism. Id venture to guess that besides negatives such as break down of cell components, walls, etc., there is an issue where when metabolism kinetics get too high, one's cells literally fester in their own garbage, and thus create a toxic environment for themselves, killing them selves effectively.
Just my guess why too high a fever is bad...
Ditto for too low a temperature, the reaction rates are not sustaining for the processes necessary for human life.
JMH
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,798
Speaking generically ...yes, sorta. Your life cycles and mutations are quicker with a warmer/hotter environment. This occurred with our bio-lagoons. You can't say that's a blanket statement though. We had extended aeration that sustained the culture. If temp was the best thing for simple organism growth, then the equator would be sustaining all the marine life as opposed to the colder waters where the O2 rich content is. Slower doesn't necessarily mean less abundant.
but yeah, on any growth medium, colder will mean slower.
garry i wasnt making a blanket statement (if i interpert you correctly), thats why i said "most". most stuff does better in hotter tempartures. the word most acknowledges that not all things do however.
also was not talking about marine life, i was refering to organisms that would live in a human.
i know theres artic ice bacteria and salmon sharks and grrenland sharks and a whole host of things that do pretty dang good in freezing tempatures.
but most things do not.
and those things dont live in people!
also was not talking about marine life, i was refering to organisms that would live in a human.
i know theres artic ice bacteria and salmon sharks and grrenland sharks and a whole host of things that do pretty dang good in freezing tempatures.
but most things do not.
and those things dont live in people!
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,798
We need to keep in mind the very narrow range we're talking here. It's not like the difference between 40F and 75F in terms of how much intracellular activity is going on.
...but we appear to be in reluctant agreement
...but we appear to be in reluctant agreement
- Status
