Surprisingly, all professional doctors, school-textbooks and other resources, consider as armpit temperatures:
> 99 ° F (some-others
> 98.6 ° F) = Fever;
= 99 ° F (Some-others
= 98.6 ° F) = Normal;
< 99 ° F (Some-others
< 98.6 ° F) = Less than normal.
But this doesn't match with my experience. I feel normal when I'm around 96 ° F (officially which is less than normal); and 98.6 ° F is clearly perceptible as fever to me. (and this is not based upon a single thermometer on single event; it is based upon many). Similarly; my mother tells 98.6 ° F is much more than a low-grade-fever whereas her normal temperature is around or below 96 ° F. On the opposite end we have seen peoples (such as my father when was youth) who did not reported any feverish or tired or such at near 100 ° F.
So it is quite surprising to me, that 99 ° F (or 98.6 ° F to some other doctors) is treated-as-definition of lower-end of universal standard. Is it really universal? or it is just an 'average' or 'consensus' that doesn't cause serious deviation if used as an overall standard.
P.S. 1: Wikipedia tells; normal temperature can vary slightly from person to person and by day of time. But I could not find any such mention about fever.
P.S. 2: How the human normal temperature could be only one particular value? Shouldn't there be a 'range' instead?