Fever is not 100F. A fever is defined as 100.4F. Why 100.4 when 100 is a much easier to remember and handle number? Because fever is defined in humans as 38C, and that converts to 100.4F.

[–] BeardedSingleMalt@kbin.social 30 points 11 months ago (1 children)

It's been a while but I think they tried to establish 100F as the average human body temperature. But after they established that baseline turns out they were off by 1.4 degrees and couldn't change it.

[–] gentooer@programming.dev 11 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

People's body temperature used to be higher a century ago, but I think it was less then 1°C.

EDIT: Apparently since the early 1800s, men's body temperature changed about 0.59°C and women's about 0.32°C.

[–] sadbehr@lemmy.nz 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

That's really interesting. Does anyone know why?

[–] gentooer@programming.dev 4 points 11 months ago

I believe there's a theory that the average person had at least one source of inflammation in their body.

[–] SwagGaribaldi@lemmy.world 12 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Hasn't the fever temperature changed recently or something

[–] Daft_ish@lemmy.world 44 points 11 months ago (1 children)

You're right. April 8th 2000 Christopher Walken caught a fever that changed the course of history forever. He had a fever and the only cure was more cow bell.

[–] jaybone@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

He kept that uncomfortable hunk of metal up his ass.

[–] Ultraviolet@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago (1 children)

That's a sigfig error. A fever is 38C, which is 2 significant digits. Converting to 100° F goes up an order of magnitude so you get a free sigfig, but unless the original number was 38.0C, you don't get that 0.4, you're implying precision that the original measurement never gave you.

[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

A fever is defined as 100.4F

Who defines it like that? I'm asking because I wouldn't be surprised if the definition differs between orgs

[–] cantsurf@lemm.ee 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

It's actually an irrational number, but for most purposes 100.4159F is a perfectly reasonable approximation.

[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

No I was wondering who defines it as 37C/100.4F

[–] cantsurf@lemm.ee 1 points 11 months ago

IUPAC

[–] quantenzitrone@feddit.de 1 points 11 months ago

°F and °C, unless you're speaking of Coulomb and Farad.