The increasing use of time-series analyses in exploring the relationship between daily ambient temperature and mortality has expanded our understanding of the potential health impacts of climate change. However, it raises significant concerns about the risk of overinterpretation and misattribution of statistical findings. This review examines the methodological assumptions and interpretation pitfalls prevalent in current research on ambient temperature-mortality associations. Extremely elevated ambient temperatures are well-known to elicit physiological stress and increase mortality risk; however, there is no physiological evidence for lethality risk within normal ambient temperature ranges. Despite this, many studies attribute mortality risks across the entire ambient temperature-mortality curve, including normal range ambient temperatures, thus oversimplifying complex underlying physiological processes. Overinterpretation may lead to inaccurate assessments and misguided public health policies. We caution against the tendency to extrapolate results from extreme heat conditions to milder, more typical summer ambient temperature ranges. We advocate for an interdisciplinary approach that combines physiological, clinical, and epidemiological perspectives, with a strong emphasis on the role of behavioral thermoregulation and socio-economic factors to link normal range ambient temperatures with mortality. We recommend analyses centered on excess mortality during defined heatwave periods, and to incorporate heat stress biomarkers to substantiate causal claims for temperatures below heatwaves threshold. A careful approach to interpreting ambient temperature-mortality associations is crucial for formulating evidence-based public health policies.