this post was submitted on 03 Feb 2025
342 points (99.4% liked)

InsanePeopleFacebook

2866 readers
744 users here now

Screenshots of people being insane on Facebook. Please censor names/pics of end users in screenshots. Please follow the rules of lemmy.world

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Chocrates 51 points 17 hours ago (3 children)

102.6 in an infant was er territory I thought

[–] PM_Your_Nudes_Please 3 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

Yeah, pretty much anything in the triple digits is “call the pediatrician” levels when dealing with babies. Babies’ immune response is more focused on accepting immunizations from breast milk, and it will basically try to integrate things that have been filtered through mom first. The default response isn’t straight to “kill it” but rather “study it so we can protect against it later.” So babies’ immune systems really aren’t prepared for a full blown infection, because it won’t jump to actually fighting the infection until it is already pretty bad. If their temp is in the triple digits, it’s usually a sign that they caught something that didn’t already get filtered through mom’s immune system.

[–] SinningStromgald 39 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

For infants it is usually recommended to seek treatment from your pediatrician for a temp over 100.4°F. (See link)

https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/infant-and-toddler-health/in-depth/healthy-baby/art-20047793

[–] Hawke 24 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Gotta love that metric dust.

100.4 F is 38 C which is the actual measurement.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago

In defense of Fahrenheit, the resolution for human relevant temperatures is higher. Theoretically ideal for medical settings.

But not if you use whole number Celsius and just convert to Fahrenheit.

[–] psmgx 7 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (3 children)

Yeah above 100 is doctor visit time, be it in C or F

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Above 100c I'm not wasting money on a doctor.

[–] FlyingSquid -2 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

Then I sure as hell hope you've never been responsible for caring for an infant.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

If baby temperature is 100c, its more reducing it to a simmer and covering with a lid temperature rather than a doctor temperature

[–] MothmanDelorian 2 points 2 hours ago

At 100c it has been dead for a very long time. 63C is medium rare for pork which means most humans should be well cooked at that temp.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

In Celsius, 40º+ deserves a hospital visit (35-36º is the usual body temp). If you somehow manage to get it to 100º, please take pictures, I'm pretty sure the body would glow

[–] MothmanDelorian 1 points 2 hours ago

At 38c you should be calling the doctor and at 39 you should be in the ER.

[–] PM_Your_Nudes_Please 8 points 9 hours ago

I'm pretty sure the body would glow

Nah, boiling water doesn’t glow. But it would probably be pretty foamy, from all of the proteins in the boiling blood.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (1 children)

100 degrees C for 30 minutes, longer than that and the meat gets too stringy

[–] [email protected] 5 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

I would have though a baby would be treated more like a brisket and that's way to little time.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 11 hours ago

Apologies I got my cooking instructions from google ai

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 hours ago

Perhaps a nice braise