Sickie Here. "Acute Febrile Illness" as they say :)

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 08, 2013 6:43 PM GMT
    I've spent the last 48 hours more asleep than awake. My temp went to 102.2 at one point. I've been slow-moving, achy, skin/scalp hurts, blah, poor appetite (but I can eat normally and hold it down, so I do, even with discomfort).

    Only symptom was the fever. No rash or lymph node swollen or anything. Only hooked up with good guys recently, so I'd be surprised if it was HIV from a medical standpoint (but from a protestant upbringing, a guilt standpoint I deserve it for all the sex I've had premarriage or out of committed relationships).

    Not sure where I got it from. Possibly from seeing a patient on Friday I had to gown up for, but your eyeballs are still exposed, and you can contract flu from mucous membranes in your eyeballs, right?

    I got my flu shot, still got sick. But I think it's tapering off after 2 days. Could have been worse.

    I'm against fever reducers because I think they counter your body's normal immune response to rid itself of infection. I find a lot of supporting websites for this belief online, but none of the websites have been overly trustworthy. What do yall think about fever reducers? Maybe if your fever is over 104-5 and you're going to get brain damage, then maybe I'd take one, but someone would have to get one for me because I'd be home alone and unable to get to the store at that point icon_razz.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 08, 2013 9:52 PM GMT
    I'm all for fever reducers as long as they're not overused. I don't see why you should stop taking acetaminophen (or ibuprofen) for a fever since antipyretics do not have any antibiotic properties. These meds reduce fever and pain and will not stop your white blood cells from doing their job. For me, I'd rather take the med for a fever. Even though clinical trials have not proven that high fevers can start breaking down enzymes and proteins, I don't want to take that risk. Just make sure not take more than 4 grams of acetaminophen daily or else your liver will not like you.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 08, 2013 10:32 PM GMT
    Interesting question.

    I take fever pills only when it become really bad, always did. Mix of good enough immune system and also that thing I heard decade ago about fever being a generic body reaction to fight off bacteria and viruses, placing them in non optimal temperature.

    But lately, I also wondered if it true or just not.

    Because I could imagine fever being induced by the tiny attacker to cripple the immune system by increasing temperature.

    On an evolutionary standpoint, both hypothesis are as valid.
  • Import

    Posts: 7190

    Feb 08, 2013 10:35 PM GMT
    bluey2223 saidI've spent the last 48 hours more asleep than awake. My temp went to 102.2 at one point. I've been slow-moving, achy, skin/scalp hurts, blah, poor appetite (but I can eat normally and hold it down, so I do, even with discomfort).

    Only symptom was the fever. No rash or lymph node swollen or anything. Only hooked up with good guys recently, so I'd be surprised if it was HIV from a medical standpoint (but from a protestant upbringing, a guilt standpoint I deserve it for all the sex I've had premarriage or out of committed relationships).

    Not sure where I got it from. Possibly from seeing a patient on Friday I had to gown up for, but your eyeballs are still exposed, and you can contract flu from mucous membranes in your eyeballs, right?

    I got my flu shot, still got sick. But I think it's tapering off after 2 days. Could have been worse.

    I'm against fever reducers because I think they counter your body's normal immune response to rid itself of infection. I find a lot of supporting websites for this belief online, but none of the websites have been overly trustworthy. What do yall think about fever reducers? Maybe if your fever is over 104-5 and you're going to get brain damage, then maybe I'd take one, but someone would have to get one for me because I'd be home alone and unable to get to the store at that point icon_razz.gif



    I love how u went out of ur way to rule out that ur current illness isn't HIV.
    like wtf?

    ppl get colds, flus, infections every winter, why would u even think it is HIV? like i dunno, seemed so weird to even mention it.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 08, 2013 10:37 PM GMT
    Erik101 saidI'm all for fever reducers as long as they're not overused. I don't see why you should stop taking acetaminophen (or ibuprofen) for a fever since antipyretics do not have any antibiotic properties. These meds reduce fever and pain and will not stop your white blood cells from doing their job. For me, I'd rather take the med for a fever. Even though clinical trials have not proven that high fevers can start breaking down enzymes and proteins, I don't want to take that risk. Just make sure not take more than 4 grams of acetaminophen daily or else your liver will not like you.


    And less if you are a regular drinker. The better you handle alcohol, the more careful you need to be about paracetamol dose.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 08, 2013 10:43 PM GMT
    bluey2223 saidOnly hooked up with good guys recently, so I'd be surprised if it was HIV from a medical standpoint (but from a protestant upbringing, a guilt standpoint I deserve it for all the sex I've had premarriage or out of committed relationships).


    So only bad boys get HIV!? You just insulted a whole host of guys and many RJers and you're asking about fever reducers?!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 09, 2013 2:36 AM GMT
    Import saidppl get colds, flus, infections every winter, why would u even think it is HIV? like i dunno, seemed so weird to even mention it.


    Not Protestant, huh?
  • jim_sf

    Posts: 2094

    Feb 09, 2013 4:12 AM GMT
    UndercoverMan said
    bluey2223 saidOnly hooked up with good guys recently, so I'd be surprised if it was HIV from a medical standpoint (but from a protestant upbringing, a guilt standpoint I deserve it for all the sex I've had premarriage or out of committed relationships).


    So only bad boys get HIV!? You just insulted a whole host of guys and many RJers and you're asking about fever reducers?!


    I'm not insulted. Bad boys seem to get all the date-able boys.

    As for fever reducers: if your fever is really more than 40C/104F, then shouldn't you really be seeing a medical professional? As in, RIGHT AWAY?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 09, 2013 4:16 AM GMT
    drama
  • starboard5

    Posts: 969

    Feb 09, 2013 4:33 AM GMT
    Sorry you're going through this. I know you took a flu shot and it obviously didn't do what it was supposed to do; you might have tried Tamiflu in the first 48 hours to lessen the severity of the infection. Keep it on hand.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 09, 2013 5:06 AM GMT
    Some pathogens are fairly temp sensitive and fevers can slow or inhibit some bacterial processes. However, the bodies natural reaction to elevate temperate increases the activity of the macrophages which surround and attack invaders and cell debris. So as much as the elevated temperature may inhibit the growth of some organisms by some degree, it has much more to do with improving the efficiency of the immune system So for low grade fevers I let nature run it's course. Obviously if a fever hits 104 it is time for urgent medical attention. Otherwise unless the fever is causing cold sweats, and extreme discomfort, etc, then I try to let the bodies natural intelligence have the directors seat.

  • Import

    Posts: 7190

    Feb 09, 2013 5:51 AM GMT
    mickeytopogigio said
    Import saidppl get colds, flus, infections every winter, why would u even think it is HIV? like i dunno, seemed so weird to even mention it.


    Not Protestant, huh?


    Im catholic.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 09, 2013 8:59 AM GMT
    I think the benefit of antipyretics treating fever outweigh the detrimental effects that may be caused by antipyretic usage. For a brief illness, the window of harm is even smaller assuming you are taking the medication at prescribed doses. Even if there is an immunological impairment of endogenous antipyretic effects, you also have to consider the metabolic effects of continuing to have a fever.

    You also might want to revise your moral judgment of people with HIV. Being a "bad" or "good" person has nothing to do with HIV.
  • Medjai

    Posts: 2671

    Feb 09, 2013 9:11 AM GMT
    Let it run td course. To date there is no evidence that OTC cold medications actually work, either to significantly reduce symptoms, or the length of infection. They'll just help with cough and sleeplessness.

    Up to you, but they're a massive waste of money.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 10, 2013 4:50 PM GMT
    Fever is gone; just have some headache left from my head being so hot that long icon_smile.gif

    As for everyone who misread my original post, or perhaps I wrote too generically, I did not even intend for it to be taken the way a few of you took my post. I've inherited a lovely ability of my mother to inaccurately state what I mean. So if you interpreted moral judgment, that was your filter and not what I said.

    And if you still have a problem with that, fuck you. You don't know my history, so stop judging me to think I'm judging you since you're doing the exact same thing you're accusing me of.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 10, 2013 5:22 PM GMT
    i had a fever back in november for 2 days. i basically slept 32 of 36 hours. i was training with a guy who didn't realize he had the flu yet and we were all over the same equipment, because we train all the time and it's rarely an issue. i'm glad i didn't write anything for people to quote me on.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 10, 2013 6:05 PM GMT
    There is no therapeutic value in maintaining a fever. The only time doctors will recommend not treating a fever is to allow for diagnosis, as some infections have characteristic patterns.

    "There are many reports on the beneficial effect of elevated temperature in animals during infectious challenges. In addition, in vitro cultures of animal or human cells at elevated temperature are supportive of a heightened immune response as well as increased bactericidal killing. However, there are no studies that fever itself facilitates the recovery from infection or acts as an adjuvant to the immune system. In fact, peripheral PGE2 production is a potent immunosuppressant and during influenza vaccination, treatment with NSAID increases the anti-influenzal antibody level. Hence, treating fever and its symptoms does no harm and does not slow the resolution of common viral and bacterial infections."
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 14, 2013 3:21 AM GMT
    oozyrat saidThere is no therapeutic value in maintaining a fever. The only time doctors will recommend not treating a fever is to allow for diagnosis, as some infections have characteristic patterns.

    "There are many reports on the beneficial effect of elevated temperature in animals during infectious challenges. In addition, in vitro cultures of animal or human cells at elevated temperature are supportive of a heightened immune response as well as increased bactericidal killing. However, there are no studies that fever itself facilitates the recovery from infection or acts as an adjuvant to the immune system. In fact, peripheral PGE2 production is a potent immunosuppressant and during influenza vaccination, treatment with NSAID increases the anti-influenzal antibody level. Hence, treating fever and its symptoms does no harm and does not slow the resolution of common viral and bacterial infections."


    So in vitro it has been proven that maintaining the fever is actually beneficial, but then you say there are no human studies, which makes sense because how would one even test this hypothesis in vivo? Make the same person get a fever twice of a fake virus and see how they react? Sounds ethical. Just because it's not yet proven in the science (and never will be) does not support use of fever reducing drugs. It sounds like it's up to personal preference.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 14, 2013 3:21 AM GMT
    RedWhiteBlue saidi had a fever back in november for 2 days. i basically slept 32 of 36 hours. i was training with a guy who didn't realize he had the flu yet and we were all over the same equipment, because we train all the time and it's rarely an issue. i'm glad i didn't write anything for people to quote me on.



    Ok bitch. Thanks for your fucking contribution. Now go to hell and fuck off while at it.
  • natsimjac1988

    Posts: 109

    Feb 14, 2013 3:33 AM GMT
    Currently sick myself. My temp just hit 102.8. My thing is that I feel like I get sick way more often than a lot of the people in my life. I feel like that must mean I don't have a relatively high immune system... But I eat pretty healthy, work out 5 days a week, and yet I still get some rough sickness at least once every six weeks. It's just starting to annoy me, thinking about going to see a nutritionist.
    As for fever reducers, in the past when I was sick I would avoid taking them unless my fever hit 104 or higher. So I think I would say I agree.
  • natsimjac1988

    Posts: 109

    Feb 14, 2013 3:33 AM GMT
    I mean six months, once every six months. Sorry for the typo.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 14, 2013 8:35 AM GMT
    bluey2223 said
    oozyrat saidThere is no therapeutic value in maintaining a fever. The only time doctors will recommend not treating a fever is to allow for diagnosis, as some infections have characteristic patterns.

    "There are many reports on the beneficial effect of elevated temperature in animals during infectious challenges. In addition, in vitro cultures of animal or human cells at elevated temperature are supportive of a heightened immune response as well as increased bactericidal killing. However, there are no studies that fever itself facilitates the recovery from infection or acts as an adjuvant to the immune system. In fact, peripheral PGE2 production is a potent immunosuppressant and during influenza vaccination, treatment with NSAID increases the anti-influenzal antibody level. Hence, treating fever and its symptoms does no harm and does not slow the resolution of common viral and bacterial infections."


    So in vitro it has been proven that maintaining the fever is actually beneficial, but then you say there are no human studies, which makes sense because how would one even test this hypothesis in vivo? Make the same person get a fever twice of a fake virus and see how they react? Sounds ethical. Just because it's not yet proven in the science (and never will be) does not support use of fever reducing drugs. It sounds like it's up to personal preference.


    No, you took it a step too far. It's been proven that increased temperatures may heighten the immune activities at the cell level, but this has not been shown to carry over to the clinical level. Just because there may be more activity in the cells doesn't translate to a decreased duration of illness or more robust immune response systemically, and the only in vivo evidence we do have is that suppressing a fever after immunization or suppressing inflammatory markers actually stimulates the immune system. So the clinical evidence we DO have suggests there is no harm in suppressing fevers during illness and may actually be beneficial.

    Okay, this is boring. Let's pick something new.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 16, 2013 4:10 AM GMT
    natsimjac1988 saidCurrently sick myself. My temp just hit 102.8. My thing is that I feel like I get sick way more often than a lot of the people in my life. I feel like that must mean I don't have a relatively high immune system... But I eat pretty healthy, work out 5 days a week, and yet I still get some rough sickness at least once every six weeks. It's just starting to annoy me, thinking about going to see a nutritionist.
    As for fever reducers, in the past when I was sick I would avoid taking them unless my fever hit 104 or higher. So I think I would say I agree.


    Well I'd go see an RD over a nutritionist unless you don't care who you accept nutrition information from, as one title is regulated and the other anyone can sport if they want to.

    Sorry you're sick too. It sucks. I didn't even have the energy to troll the internet.

    Also, I still am on the fence about fever reducers. I just would things take their natural course because I am not convinced about the efficacy of modern medicine treatments beyond antibiotics, necessary surgeries (many aren't), and antivirals. Taking a pill so you don't get headaches isn't going to help the physiological cascade in my opinion. The reason people get headaches is lack of sleep, lack of exercise, stress, and poor blood sugar control, diabetic or not.