VO2max comparison

NorthCascades

I'm assuming the "how you compare" feature in Connect compares you to fellow athletes. Does anybody know where to find a chart for the general population? I'm curious.

BrianSharpe

Something like this?

topendsports.com/testing/norms/vo2max.htm

NorthCascades

Yes, but for couch potatoes.

dewd2

BrianSharpe wrote: »

Something like this?

topendsports.com/testing/norms/vo2max.htm

Nice to know at age 48 I'm an above average 18-25 year old.

heybales

So like for finer granularity? Because I've always liked that site too.

Because you ain't no couch potato!

NorthCascades

My girlfriend has a close friend who's my age. (39) She refuses to walk uphill. She hurt her knee walking up a hill and won't do it anymore. Does no exercise. I can't help wondering what somebody like that would score. I feel like there are more couch potatoes in the world, and 36 to 38 seems high to me. But I'm guessing here.

I'm curious because I keep reading how VO2max is a great predictor of longevity. I've been proactive about my health as I age, and I'm curious about this stuff.

Djproulx

NorthCascades wrote: »

I'm curious because I keep reading how VO2max is a great predictor of longevity. I've been proactive about my health as I age, and I'm curious about this stuff.

I'm very curious about it as well. I can't remember where the Garmin Connect measurement shows up, so I'm going to have to keep looking. I"d like to compare my reading to the testing chart categories above.

heybales

I wonder if the lower end starts where the math shows the 3.5 VO2 mL/kg/min for an average person for RMR.
Which is typically rounded to the 1 cal/kg/hr.

That's the math MFP used to convert the public METS database they use to weight based. At least I recall checking that years back.

But for 36 low end, that would mean 10 KG, and that can't be correct.

Let's see, say TDEE 2000, BMR 1600, avg 150 lb/68 kg = 68 x 24 = 1632, so close, even closer to RMR.

3.5 x 68 = 238, well, that's obviously not correct too.

So I have no idea why it starts the low end where it did - must be studies of sedentary people. Probably the NASA study with tons of measurements.

heybales

Djproulx wrote: »

NorthCascades wrote: »

I'm curious because I keep reading how VO2max is a great predictor of longevity. I've been proactive about my health as I age, and I'm curious about this stuff.

I'm very curious about it as well. I can't remember where the Garmin Connect measurement shows up, so I'm going to have to keep looking. I"d like to compare my reading to the testing chart categories above.

Do you have one of the devices that reports it?
https://www8.garmin.com/manuals/webhelp/Forerunner920XT/EN-US/GUID-015C6746-435D-48E0-8ED8-CA2C81684E38.html

The 310XT doesn't for instance. Though I know from the study by First Beat it estimates it and uses it in calculations - and there for awhile from what appears have been a glitch Garmin site showed it to me - but they pulled it back off. Probably licensing issue.

Duck_Puddle

Would there be enough measurements of VO2max for non-athletes to be able to gauge something for the general population? Charts with standards are fine, but that doesn't tell you where the bell curve is in relation to that (which I think is what you're asking). But my Garmin calculates my VO2max every time I go for an activity I indicate is a run or a bike ride. Otherwise, I wouldn't know or care (meaning the number is really only meaningful to me because I do those things). I would assume most couch potatoes don't care either (nor have devices that estimate it nor participate in the kind of testing to determine it in a lab). I don't know that there's going to be data to tell for the general population.

Duck_Puddle

Djproulx wrote: »

NorthCascades wrote: »

I'm curious because I keep reading how VO2max is a great predictor of longevity. I've been proactive about my health as I age, and I'm curious about this stuff.

I'm very curious about it as well. I can't remember where the Garmin Connect measurement shows up, so I'm going to have to keep looking. I"d like to compare my reading to the testing chart categories above.

Mine shows up under the "performance stats" section of the mobile app. I don't use the web version of Connect so I'm not sure if it's somewhere different there.

NorthCascades

Djproulx wrote: »

NorthCascades wrote: »

I'm curious because I keep reading how VO2max is a great predictor of longevity. I've been proactive about my health as I age, and I'm curious about this stuff.

I'm very curious about it as well. I can't remember where the Garmin Connect measurement shows up, so I'm going to have to keep looking. I"d like to compare my reading to the testing chart categories above.

From the mobile app, open the menu, hit performance stats, select this one from the list, and then help at the top right.

Psychgrrl

Is there a chart for women? I'm guessing it'd be different than the men, yes?

Djproulx

NorthCascades wrote: »

Djproulx wrote: »

NorthCascades wrote: »

I'm curious because I keep reading how VO2max is a great predictor of longevity. I've been proactive about my health as I age, and I'm curious about this stuff.

I'm very curious about it as well. I can't remember where the Garmin Connect measurement shows up, so I'm going to have to keep looking. I"d like to compare my reading to the testing chart categories above.

From the mobile app, open the menu, hit performance stats, select this one from the list, and then help at the top right.

Got it! thanks. I was viewing from PC, so switched to mobile and there it was.

@Heybales - I have a 920xt.

So next question: The Garmin shows 2 readings, VO2 Max and Cycling VO2 Max. I assume that the VO2 Max I'm seeing is a running measurement? or is it a combination of all Garmin measurements (in my case, running and cycling, since I assume it wouldn't factor in my swimming values without a swimming HRM)

I'll have to dig deeper. According to Garmin, For my age (59), My "VO2 max" value falls in the Superior range, but my Cycling VO2 max is 8 points lower, or in the GOOD range. Other than the fact that I've been doggin' it on the bike, I'm wondering what this tells me about possible overall upside potential?

The other measurement related to measuring Fitness is LTHR, which my coach considers a better indicator.

Duck_Puddle

Running and cycling separately. The non-specified one is running.

topomapper

NorthCascades wrote: »

Djproulx wrote: »

NorthCascades wrote: »

I'm curious because I keep reading how VO2max is a great predictor of longevity. I've been proactive about my health as I age, and I'm curious about this stuff.

I'm very curious about it as well. I can't remember where the Garmin Connect measurement shows up, so I'm going to have to keep looking. I"d like to compare my reading to the testing chart categories above.

From the mobile app, open the menu, hit performance stats, select this one from the list, and then help at the top right.

I have a Vivosmart 3. Press on the clock until the little man shows up then swipe down until VO2 Max shows up. Press that for the number. Swipe down from there and it will give you the last test date. Swipe down again and you can run another test.

topomapper

It has me at 39 which is at the upper end of good but my friends are still kicking my *kitten* so I am doubtful about accuracy without a real HRM strapped on.

Djproulx

Duck_Puddle wrote: »

Running and cycling separately. The non-specified one is running.

Makes sense. I'm guessing that the running value (VO2 max) is the measurement most people (other than cyclists) would use when comparing to an outside source, such as the chart in the link above.

heybales

Psychgrrl wrote: »

Is there a chart for women? I'm guessing it'd be different than the men, yes?

Scroll down with the link given in this topic.

NorthCascades

Djproulx wrote: »

Duck_Puddle wrote: »

Running and cycling separately. The non-specified one is running.

Makes sense. I'm guessing that the running value (VO2 max) is the measurement most people (other than cyclists) would use when comparing to an outside source, such as the chart in the link above.

First, it's very common for people to test higher running than cycling. Mine is 5 ml/kg/min higher for running.

You can get a lab test done running on a treadmill, or on a specialized indoor bike (ergometer). If you cared to, you could test both in a lab and see how Garmin compares.

For what it's worth, Garmin doesn't make the VO2max software, they license it from First Beat. So does Suunto and Pulse On and a few others. It's probably better than other not lab methods.

DX2JX2

NorthCascades wrote: »

Djproulx wrote: »

Duck_Puddle wrote: »

Running and cycling separately. The non-specified one is running.

Makes sense. I'm guessing that the running value (VO2 max) is the measurement most people (other than cyclists) would use when comparing to an outside source, such as the chart in the link above.

First, it's very common for people to test higher running than cycling. Mine is 5 ml/kg/min higher for running.

You can get a lab test done running on a treadmill, or on a specialized indoor bike (ergometer). If you cared to, you could test both in a lab and see how Garmin compares.

For what it's worth, Garmin doesn't make the VO2max software, they license it from First Beat. So does Suunto and Pulse On and a few others. It's probably better than other not lab methods.

I forget where I saw it (maybe Runner's World), but somebody did a test that showed that the Garmin VO2 estimates were actually pretty reasonable. Don't get me wrong, a full lab test is absolutely better but at least estimates from our fitness trackers are better than nothing.

Djproulx

Thanks for the clarifications. Chatting with my coach about this and she echoed the comments about Lab tests being best, with Garmin VO2 estimates being a reasonable guess. Again, from a "fitness" point of view, she believes LTHR is a better indicator and tools such as Training Peaks' Performance Management Chart give a more useful picture of an athlete's trending in fitness, fatigue and race readiness.

To @NorthCascades earlier point: I'm going to assume that my VO2 max numbers are a predictor of potential longevity. The problem is that in my case, my brain will wear out long before my body does.

NorthCascades

I agree, the Performance Management Chart is the best thing since sliced bread.

But I'm confused about LTHR. I think it's way better for setting your zones, but it doesn't change much in trained athletes so I don't see how it would be an indicator of fitness?

Djproulx

In her words: " Garmin uses algorithms along with your HRM and activity to determine these results (VO2). At the end of the day, if you are consistently using the same HRM and device and are seeing the number increase, it should mean your overall fitness is increasing. I personally think LTHR is a better indicator, but that's just me."

So it is possible that she is not thrilled with VO2 measurements from devices and just prefers HR.

In my case, we did a 5k run threshold test in the late spring. My run speed has improved over the summer and she wants to retest in the next few weeks. I'm expecting that my run HR zones will change, and I'm guessing from her response that she believes some change in LT may occur as well. I will dig into this next time I see her for clarification.