Heart rate - should peak account for resting?
Kdp2015
Posts: 519 Member
My resting heart rate is (apparently) 45 bpm - I'm 31 yr old female. My peak acc to Fitbit is over 160 and I never get this high. Can I assume my peak is lower as my resting is so low or do I just need to push myself harder to reach it? Thanks in advance
0
Replies
-
Also how likely is it that my resting really is 45, I have low blood pressure but not really sure if that makes a difference?0
-
Min and max aren't really related, it's very individual.
Easy enough to check your pulse first thing in the morning to find your minimum.
To find your true maximum (as opposed to estimated or customary high) you do need to push yourself to extreme levels. There's different protocols for different exercises so if you are a runner use a running protocol, if you are a cyclist.....
45 is low compared to the general population but if you are CV fit it's not extreme, I'm far older and mine is 48.0 -
Cool thank you0
-
What sijomial said.
I'm 41, and an example where the resting is relatively low (~40), and max is quite high (a little over 205 since I can get and stay there for a couple of minutes). Max appears to say nothing about health, fitness, etc and is attributed to genetics. Usually reduces some as you age.0 -
My resting heart rate is (apparently) 45 bpm - I'm 31 yr old female. My peak acc to Fitbit is over 160 and I never get this high. Can I assume my peak is lower as my resting is so low or do I just need to push myself harder to reach it? Thanks in advance
Ah, another FitBit inaccuracy. Although there are several methods for figuring HR Max, a commonly used, easy to figure formula is 220 - age, which in your case would be 189ish. Although not exact, 160 seems way too low for you.
Resting HR and Max HR are not related.
I am quite a bit older than you and my HR max is quite a bit higher. I hit 160 routinely while training, though not using a FItBit. My HR monitor, a Polar, is generally held to be EKG-accurate. My resting HR is 46. And before I dumped the fitbit, it never went above 117. So you probably do get near 160, FitBit just doesn't tell you.0 -
160 relates to peak "zone" not actual maxPiperGirl08 wrote: »My resting heart rate is (apparently) 45 bpm - I'm 31 yr old female. My peak acc to Fitbit is over 160 and I never get this high. Can I assume my peak is lower as my resting is so low or do I just need to push myself harder to reach it? Thanks in advance
Ah, another FitBit inaccuracy. Although there are several methods for figuring HR Max, a commonly used, easy to figure formula is 220 - age, which in your case would be 189ish. Although not exact, 160 seems way too low for you.
Resting HR and Max HR are not related.
I am quite a bit older than you and my HR max is quite a bit higher. I hit 160 routinely while training, though not using a FItBit. My HR monitor, a Polar, is generally held to be EKG-accurate. My resting HR is 46. And before I dumped the fitbit, it never went above 117. So you probably do get near 160, FitBit just doesn't tell you.
0 -
do I just need to push myself harder to reach it?
Probably that. "Peak" zone is a fancy, consumer friendly term Fitbit uses to denote working at an intensity which targets your anaerobic threshold. Without having an accurate idea of what your actual MHR is it isn't really possible to give you a number to aim for but the effort will be hard, you will be breathing heavily and you probably won't be able to maintain it for long depending on your fitness level.
I would suggest however that the majority of the time you spend exercising will be better served below this level at a more comfortable effort level which you can do for longer.
0 -
PiperGirl08 wrote: »My resting heart rate is (apparently) 45 bpm - I'm 31 yr old female. My peak acc to Fitbit is over 160 and I never get this high. Can I assume my peak is lower as my resting is so low or do I just need to push myself harder to reach it? Thanks in advance
Ah, another FitBit inaccuracy. Although there are several methods for figuring HR Max, a commonly used, easy to figure formula is 220 - age, which in your case would be 189ish. Although not exact, 160 seems way too low for you.
Resting HR and Max HR are not related.
I am quite a bit older than you and my HR max is quite a bit higher. I hit 160 routinely while training, though not using a FItBit. My HR monitor, a Polar, is generally held to be EKG-accurate. My resting HR is 46. And before I dumped the fitbit, it never went above 117. So you probably do get near 160, FitBit just doesn't tell you.
But this equation 220-age is related to a normal distribution. That means that about 2/3 of all people at the same age have at least a maximum heart rate that is 15 beats per minute higher or lower than this number. 5% of all people in a given age group, that's every 20th has a heart rate that is more than 30 bpm higher or lower. Please don't use this equation as it keeps people from exercising properly. It is only kind of valid for 1/3 of all people if you think that up to 15 bpm more or less than the calculated number is still acceptable.
Thus TO, if you don't know what your maximum heart rate is exactly then please don't train with any heart rate zones!
example? My max HR is a whopping 210. If i were to train at say 70% of the 220-age equation then I would not be running anymore, but walking. Someone with a very low maxHR would collapse from exhaustion and think she's completely unfit as she cannot reach the 'goal zone'.0 -
Yep Zumba got me to 179 last night and that was plenty high enough!!0
-
PiperGirl08 wrote: »My resting heart rate is (apparently) 45 bpm - I'm 31 yr old female. My peak acc to Fitbit is over 160 and I never get this high. Can I assume my peak is lower as my resting is so low or do I just need to push myself harder to reach it? Thanks in advance
Ah, another FitBit inaccuracy. Although there are several methods for figuring HR Max, a commonly used, easy to figure formula is 220 - age, which in your case would be 189ish. Although not exact, 160 seems way too low for you.
Resting HR and Max HR are not related.
I am quite a bit older than you and my HR max is quite a bit higher. I hit 160 routinely while training, though not using a FItBit. My HR monitor, a Polar, is generally held to be EKG-accurate. My resting HR is 46. And before I dumped the fitbit, it never went above 117. So you probably do get near 160, FitBit just doesn't tell you.
But this equation 220-age is related to a normal distribution. That means that about 2/3 of all people at the same age have at least a maximum heart rate that is 15 beats per minute higher or lower than this number. 5% of all people in a given age group, that's every 20th has a heart rate that is more than 30 bpm higher or lower. Please don't use this equation as it keeps people from exercising properly. It is only kind of valid for 1/3 of all people if you think that up to 15 bpm more or less than the calculated number is still acceptable.
Thus TO, if you don't know what your maximum heart rate is exactly then please don't train with any heart rate zones!
example? My max HR is a whopping 210. If i were to train at say 70% of the 220-age equation then I would not be running anymore, but walking. Someone with a very low maxHR would collapse from exhaustion and think she's completely unfit as she cannot reach the 'goal zone'.
She asked if 160 reasonable value for her at 31. If we're talking about Max HR, which it seems based on her later posts we're not, then 220-age is a quick and easy way to determine if 160 is anywhere in the ball park. I did mention that there are numerous equations available, but I elected not to do the math. If one wants to be really precise, one can also test it out in a lab or doctor's office.
But for the sake of what it seemed she wanted to know (but wasn't), the formula I gave is quick and close enough for the intended purpose.
As far as "peak" in Fitbit, probably do some research on HR Zone training, calculate your ranges, remember them or figure out which ones you're targeting in a given workout and the ranges for those, and ignore the fitbit terminology (and the HR numbers it gives you -- it measures low as exercise intensity increases).0 -
PiperGirl08 wrote: »PiperGirl08 wrote: »My resting heart rate is (apparently) 45 bpm - I'm 31 yr old female. My peak acc to Fitbit is over 160 and I never get this high. Can I assume my peak is lower as my resting is so low or do I just need to push myself harder to reach it? Thanks in advance
Ah, another FitBit inaccuracy. Although there are several methods for figuring HR Max, a commonly used, easy to figure formula is 220 - age, which in your case would be 189ish. Although not exact, 160 seems way too low for you.
Resting HR and Max HR are not related.
I am quite a bit older than you and my HR max is quite a bit higher. I hit 160 routinely while training, though not using a FItBit. My HR monitor, a Polar, is generally held to be EKG-accurate. My resting HR is 46. And before I dumped the fitbit, it never went above 117. So you probably do get near 160, FitBit just doesn't tell you.
But this equation 220-age is related to a normal distribution. That means that about 2/3 of all people at the same age have at least a maximum heart rate that is 15 beats per minute higher or lower than this number. 5% of all people in a given age group, that's every 20th has a heart rate that is more than 30 bpm higher or lower. Please don't use this equation as it keeps people from exercising properly. It is only kind of valid for 1/3 of all people if you think that up to 15 bpm more or less than the calculated number is still acceptable.
Thus TO, if you don't know what your maximum heart rate is exactly then please don't train with any heart rate zones!
example? My max HR is a whopping 210. If i were to train at say 70% of the 220-age equation then I would not be running anymore, but walking. Someone with a very low maxHR would collapse from exhaustion and think she's completely unfit as she cannot reach the 'goal zone'.
She asked if 160 reasonable value for her at 31. If we're talking about Max HR, which it seems based on her later posts we're not, then 220-age is a quick and easy way to determine if 160 is anywhere in the ball park. I did mention that there are numerous equations available, but I elected not to do the math. If one wants to be really precise, one can also test it out in a lab or doctor's office.
But for the sake of what it seemed she wanted to know (but wasn't), the formula I gave is quick and close enough for the intended purpose.
As far as "peak" in Fitbit, probably do some research on HR Zone training, calculate your ranges, remember them or figure out which ones you're targeting in a given workout and the ranges for those, and ignore the fitbit terminology (and the HR numbers it gives you -- it measures low as exercise intensity increases).
But you can't work with any HR zones and training ranges if you don't know your maximum HR. It's as useless as what the fitbit gives her. Just train and enjoy. If TO really want to train in different zones, for example slow and long vs. fast and short then it would probably help to orientate on slow: still able to talk during workout fast: impossible to talk in full sentences. That's all that is needed.0 -
Much better thank youPiperGirl08 wrote: »PiperGirl08 wrote: »My resting heart rate is (apparently) 45 bpm - I'm 31 yr old female. My peak acc to Fitbit is over 160 and I never get this high. Can I assume my peak is lower as my resting is so low or do I just need to push myself harder to reach it? Thanks in advance
Ah, another FitBit inaccuracy. Although there are several methods for figuring HR Max, a commonly used, easy to figure formula is 220 - age, which in your case would be 189ish. Although not exact, 160 seems way too low for you.
Resting HR and Max HR are not related.
I am quite a bit older than you and my HR max is quite a bit higher. I hit 160 routinely while training, though not using a FItBit. My HR monitor, a Polar, is generally held to be EKG-accurate. My resting HR is 46. And before I dumped the fitbit, it never went above 117. So you probably do get near 160, FitBit just doesn't tell you.
But this equation 220-age is related to a normal distribution. That means that about 2/3 of all people at the same age have at least a maximum heart rate that is 15 beats per minute higher or lower than this number. 5% of all people in a given age group, that's every 20th has a heart rate that is more than 30 bpm higher or lower. Please don't use this equation as it keeps people from exercising properly. It is only kind of valid for 1/3 of all people if you think that up to 15 bpm more or less than the calculated number is still acceptable.
Thus TO, if you don't know what your maximum heart rate is exactly then please don't train with any heart rate zones!
example? My max HR is a whopping 210. If i were to train at say 70% of the 220-age equation then I would not be running anymore, but walking. Someone with a very low maxHR would collapse from exhaustion and think she's completely unfit as she cannot reach the 'goal zone'.
She asked if 160 reasonable value for her at 31. If we're talking about Max HR, which it seems based on her later posts we're not, then 220-age is a quick and easy way to determine if 160 is anywhere in the ball park. I did mention that there are numerous equations available, but I elected not to do the math. If one wants to be really precise, one can also test it out in a lab or doctor's office.
But for the sake of what it seemed she wanted to know (but wasn't), the formula I gave is quick and close enough for the intended purpose.
As far as "peak" in Fitbit, probably do some research on HR Zone training, calculate your ranges, remember them or figure out which ones you're targeting in a given workout and the ranges for those, and ignore the fitbit terminology (and the HR numbers it gives you -- it measures low as exercise intensity increases).
But you can't work with any HR zones and training ranges if you don't know your maximum HR. It's as useless as what the fitbit gives her. Just train and enjoy. If TO really want to train in different zones, for example slow and long vs. fast and short then it would probably help to orientate on slow: still able to talk during workout fast: impossible to talk in full sentences. That's all that is needed.
0 -
But you can't work with any HR zones and training ranges if you don't know your maximum HR.
Not true, actually. You can base your zones off your lactate threshold heart rate instead of your maximum heart rate. Finding your LTHR will probably be more difficult for people who are new to cardio but maybe slightly less difficult for people who are fairly well trained, compared to finding your MHR. Your lactate threshold is a lot more meaningful for training purposes than your max heart rate.
http://home.trainingpeaks.com/blog/article/joe-friel-s-quick-guide-to-setting-zonesJoe Friel wrote:Setting Heart Rate Zones (Running and Cycling)
Step 1
Determine your lactate threshold heart rate (LTHR) with a short test. (Do not use 220 minus your age to find max heart rate as this is as likely to be wrong as right.)
...
Step 2
Establish your training zones. Use the following guide to establish each zone by sport.
Run Zones
Zone 1 Less than 85% of LTHR
Zone 2 85% to 89% of LTHR
Zone 3 90% to 94% of LTHR
Zone 4 95% to 99% of LTHR
Zone 5a 100% to 102% of LTHR
Zone 5b 103% to 106% of LTHR
Zone 5c More than 106% of LTHR
Bike Zones
Zone 1 Less than 81% of LTHR
Zone 2 81% to 89% of LTHR
Zone 3 90% to 93% of LTHR
Zone 4 94% to 99% of LTHR
Zone 5a 100% to 102% of LTHR
Zone 5b 103% to 106% of LTHR
Zone 5c More than 106% of LTHR0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 395K Introduce Yourself
- 44K Getting Started
- 260.6K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.2K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.7K Fitness and Exercise
- 445 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.2K Motivation and Support
- 8.2K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 4.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 16 News and Announcements
- 1.3K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.9K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions