Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Monday January 20 2020, @02:38AM   Printer-friendly
from the you're-as-cold-as-ice dept.

The planet may be warming, but a recent study indicates that mankind is going the other direction.

Researchers at the Stanford University School of Medicine have established that people's bodies are now typically cooler than the textbook figure of 37C, first established by German physician Carl Reinhold August Wunderlich in 1868.

The study shows that modern-day men have a body temperature 0.58C lower than their 19th century counterparts, while women's are 0.32C lower.

This decrease has been attributed to "changes in our environment over the past 200 years, which have in turn driven physiological changes". However, the study acknowledges that establishing cause and effect remains "inherently unprovable".

The rate of decline is about 0.03°C per birth decade. Body temperature is a marker for metabolic rate and could partially explain changes in human health and longevity over time.

Journal Reference:
Myroslava Protsiv, Catherine Ley, Joanna Lankester, Trevor Hastie, Julie Parsonnet. Decreasing human body temperature in the United States since the Industrial Revolution, (DOI: doi:10.7554/eLife.49555)


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1) by Occam_s_blade_runner on Monday January 20 2020, @07:42AM (5 children)

    by Occam_s_blade_runner (9252) on Monday January 20 2020, @07:42AM (#945713)

    Over 100 years or so, there is supposedly a heavy trend of getting less and less daily calories from fat.
    A high fat diet turns your body into a furnace. Eskimos eat the blubber to achieve this. I am by default skeptical about science. I did it on me and it turned out to be true (but n = 1). You can test this yourself, the effect is very fast to observe.

    This is yet another example of the generally broken science process nowadays. Here specifically: the fact that scientists do not sufficiently read prior art before trying to publish something, the fact that they do not seek to apply Occam's razor principle systematically, but so many more problems like the ridiculous threshold for declaring a result statistically significant, the lack of mastery of technology developed by others, the lack of mastery of statistics, the fact that the principle investigator is all too often actually just a professional grant seeker and master of getting published with trendy buzzwords and not rigorously validating the work of his young servile scientists horde. Been there, done that, only as a young servile scientist though.

  • (Score: 1) by shrewdsheep on Monday January 20 2020, @10:37AM (2 children)

    by shrewdsheep (5215) on Monday January 20 2020, @10:37AM (#945738)

    You seem to be a good scientist then. Working in academia, I can confirm that most of your criticism holds true, it is a social process after all not primarily dictated by scientific thinking let alone a rigorous thinking process. From a meta-perspective, you do not have to be as negative though. The wheel gets reinvented all the time, this way all areas get some love again after being forgotten for so long (that is very similar to how fashion works). This in turn brings old ideas into the current context which can leads to new things (neural networks, anyone?).
     

    • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday January 20 2020, @12:51PM (1 child)

      by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Monday January 20 2020, @12:51PM (#945773) Journal

      They're busy reinventing the wheel, sure enough. Machinery has to be greased, if you expect it to last. Or, I should say "lubricated", since there are many lubricants besides grease. Anyway, Arburg has reinvented the grease nipple, or alamite, or grease xerk. They give you a stupid little indentation on the equipment where the grease is supposed to go, and a little tube that you insert into that indentation. Push a couple of times, and grease is supposed to flow. Supposed to, anyway. I've found almost-but-not-quite the same indentation on the new robots as well. Except that indentation isn't quite the same as Arburg's. So now, we have two new "grease guns" which are only good for those specific pieces of equipment.

      The purpose of these reinvented alamites? It can only be early failure, because you just can't push grease through them very well.

      Given the opportunity, I'll drill them out, tap them, and put proper alamites in them. But, my half-witted boss won't hear of it. "They did it like that for a reason!!" I'd love to stuff a whole bunch of those reasons up his ass.

      The only recent invention regarding lubrication that is worthwhile, is the locklube system. https://locknlube.com/products/locknlube-grease-coupler [locknlube.com] Lock that sucker onto the xerk, and you don't have to hold it. No leakage, you know that your grease is going inside the knuckle, bearing, or whatever it's supposed to lubricate. I love those things.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 21 2020, @01:48AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 21 2020, @01:48AM (#946113)

        I'll meet your xerk and raise you a Zerk.

        Thanks for the LocknLube link, if I was using my grease gun more often I'd buy one.

  • (Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Monday January 20 2020, @01:18PM (1 child)

    by PiMuNu (3823) on Monday January 20 2020, @01:18PM (#945788)

    > Over 100 years or so, there is supposedly a heavy trend of getting less and less daily calories from fat.

    What is your point? Are you saying that body temperature has not changed, and the measurements are wrong?

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 20 2020, @07:35PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 20 2020, @07:35PM (#945929)

      Maybe you could read two sentences before you reply.