Acute cooling of the feet and the onset of common cold symptoms
Cited in 3 Likelier entries (3 risks, 0 decisions).
Used in 3 entries
For each citing entry, the verbatim excerpt and Likelier's calculation notes (how the source's number was converted to the lifetime-probability framing) are shown below. Click through to read the full claim ledger.
-
- Statistic
In a randomised controlled trial of 180 healthy volunteers, 13/90 chilled subjects reported developing a cold within 4–5 days vs 5/90 controls (P=0.047); the authors conclude that chilling may trigger latent viral symptoms in people already harbouring infection, not that cold exposure causes new infection
“"There is a common folklore that chilling of the body surface causes the development of common cold symptoms, but previous clinical research has failed to demonstrate any effect of cold exposure on susceptibility to infection with common cold viruses."”
Calculation notes
Johnson & Eccles (2005) is the most rigorous controlled experiment on chilling and cold symptom onset. The statistically significant result (13 vs 5 colds, P=0.047) was interpreted by the authors as chilling unmasking latent viral infection already present in nasal passages, not as chilling causing new infection. Critically, chilling of the feet is categorically different from drinking a cold beverage: foot chilling affects peripheral vasoconstriction and nasal mucosa temperature via reflex mechanisms, not direct thermal contact with the pharynx. Cold drinks in the mouth and throat do not cause the nasal airway temperature drop that is Eccles's proposed mechanistic pathway for symptomatic reactivation. The PubMed abstract text is used as the excerpt because the full text is behind an Oxford Academic paywall.
Source date: 2005-12-01 · Accessed: 2026-05-09
-
- Statistic
13/90 chilled subjects vs 5/90 controls self-reported cold symptoms in the 4–5 days after a 20-minute cold-foot immersion (P=0.047)
“"There is a common folklore that chilling of the body surface causes the development of common cold symptoms, but previous clinical research has failed to demonstrate any effect of cold exposure on susceptibility to infection with common cold viruses. [...] 13/90 subjects who were chilled reported they were suffering from a cold in the 4/5 days after the procedure compared to 5/90 control subjects (P=0.047). [...] Acute chilling of the feet causes the onset of common cold symptoms in around 10% of subjects who are chilled. Further studies are needed to determine the relationship of symptom generation to any respiratory infection."”
Calculation notes
This is the canonical trial behind any "cold feet causes colds" claim. Critical qualifier the authors themselves flag: the study measured self-reported symptoms, not laboratory-confirmed new infections. The plausible mechanism the authors propose is that reflex vasoconstriction in the upper airway on cold- foot exposure reduces mucosal blood flow and temporarily lowers local defences — converting a pre-existing subclinical carriage of rhinovirus or another respiratory virus into a symptomatic cold. That is a modulation effect, not a causation effect. Without an underlying viral exposure, cooling the feet is not expected to produce illness from nothing. 90 subjects per arm gives an absolute difference of 8 percentage points (14% vs 6%); the confidence bound is wide, and no replication of comparable rigour exists at the scale needed to attach a per-winter probability to "no slippers at home."
Independence note: Independent single-centre RCT at Cardiff (Common Cold Centre); editorially independent of the CDC and WHO sources. The Foxman 2015 mechanistic paper below provides a biological model compatible with Eccles' clinical result but was conducted in a separate lab with different methodology (mouse airway cells, not human subjects).
Source date: 2005-12-01 · Accessed: 2026-04-16
-
- Statistic
13/90 chilled subjects vs 5/90 controls self-reported cold symptoms in the 4–5 days after a 20-minute cold-foot immersion (P=0.047)
“"There is a common folklore that chilling of the body surface causes the development of common cold symptoms, but previous clinical research has failed to demonstrate any effect of cold exposure on susceptibility to infection with common cold viruses. [...] 13/90 subjects who were chilled reported they were suffering from a cold in the 4/5 days after the procedure compared to 5/90 control subjects (P=0.047). [...] Acute chilling of the feet causes the onset of common cold symptoms in around 10% of subjects who are chilled. Further studies are needed to determine the relationship of symptom generation to any respiratory infection."”
Calculation notes
The closest experimental evidence to the folk belief. Critical qualifier the authors themselves flag: the study measured self-reported symptoms, not laboratory-confirmed new infections. The proposed mechanism is that reflex vasoconstriction in the upper airway on cold-foot exposure reduces mucosal blood flow and temporarily lowers local defences, converting a pre-existing subclinical carriage of rhinovirus into a symptomatic cold. This is a modulation effect in people already carrying a virus, not a causation effect from cold/wet exposure alone. The absolute difference is 8 percentage points (14% vs 6%) with wide confidence bounds; no comparable replication exists. Walking in rain is a weaker chilling stimulus than the 20-minute ice-water foot immersion used in the trial, so the study represents an upper bound on any cold-exposure effect, not a direct measure of rain-walking risk.
Independence note: Independent single-centre RCT at Cardiff Common Cold Centre. Editorially independent of the CDC source below.
Source date: 2005-12-01 · Accessed: 2026-04-19
Also cited in these entries
Cold drinks cause sore throat
Does drinking cold beverages or eating ice cream cause sore throats?
Bare feet indoors
What are the odds of getting sick from walking around home without a hat, scarf, gloves, socks, or slippers?
Rain & getting sick
What are the odds of getting sick from walking in the rain without an umbrella?