Question: My normal body temperature is around 96.6 to 97.5. For the last 14 days I have been running a low grade fever in the afternoons and evenings (feel fine in the morning). Until yesterday my temp never got above 100.4, generally hovering between 99.8 to 100.3. Last night it got all the way up to 100.9.
I have Multiple Myeloma and am on Revlimid. My WBC is a little low, but not horrendously so, and except for the fever I have no other symptoms of infection. My oncologist told me to stop taking Revlimid six days ago, but it hasn't made a difference in the fever. Chest X-ray (taken on Friday) is clear. Urinalysis is clear. Nobody has come back to me on the results of the blood culture, which tells me that nobody is horribly worried about it. However, I feel miserable; you know, fevery; crawly, achey, shivery, the stuff that comes with a fever. I was told to go to urgent care if my temp went above 100.4; I did....that's why I got all those tests on Friday. I can't see going back, frankly; miserable trip and what the heck would they DO about it?
Here's my question;
It seems to me that if a 'normal' person, with an average BT of 98.6, only has to raise his temp a degree or so to get to 'low grade fever.' A two degree rise gets an adult into 'we need to worry about this a bit." and a three degree rise puts him into "Holy Cow, this guy is sick..." range; 101.6.
But my body would have to, in order to get to the 101.6 area, rise 4.5 degrees or so, and trust me, at 98.6, I'm feeling feverish.
I am finding out that elderly people often present with infections and pneumonia without fevers...but is it because they aren't 'running fevers,' or because they ARE...but since they start lower on the thermometer, nobody pays attention? In other words, what's more important here: the absolute numbers, or the relative rise in temperature?