High resting heart rate

I am 5'7 too but 215 now. I think it is better if you are sweating at 150. Means you are working it. I just look at the treadmill and my heart rate skyrockets

Fascinating topic. I do not have a high HR.

I pay close attention to my hr when I exercise (mostly running). I don't think you should sustain 90%+ of your HR over a longer period of time. In my own experience that time is 3-5 minutes max. Like any muscle it's subject to tearing and failing if you go over the capacity. It's scary.

I have a high resting heart rate. Due to that and frequent heart palpitations I was experiencing at 18 I ended up going into the hospital and being referred to a cardiologist.

Ended up getting diagnosed with tachycardia (high resting heart rate), and mitral valve prolapse. One nurse once expressed concern of me possibly having A-Fib after watching me on a pulse monitor while getting unrelated testing done, but I've never received that diagnosis. I'm on a beta blocker to help my heart slow down from the mitral valve prolapse.

While at my heaviest weight (about 230), my resting heart rate could vary between 100 and 140 bpm without medication. I had to have a stress test once, which had to be induced medically instead of running on a treadmill because the running was deemed unsafe for me as I was already at my exercise target heart rate that they wanted while I was resting.

I've lost about 130 pounds now and was taken off one of my heart meds due to my weight loss and exercising more. I'm still on a low dose beta blocker. My resting heart rate now averages about 70-80 bpm. I honestly don't track my heart rate while working out, but I only do weight lifting, and low intensity walks (sometimes jogs) on the treadmill and low intensity (around 8 mph) on the stationairy bike. My high intensity cardio is nil, mainly because I also have dislocating knee caps and the last thing I want to do is pop my knee out at a full out run.

A normal heart rate is between 60-100 beats per minute, no? Though you're on the higher scale it's definitely not abnormally high. The more fit you get, the better your resting heart rate should be. It's why i LOVE cardio. I have a heart rate of 60 per minute. I would of loved to have known what it was before i started my cardio.

A very high resting heart rate was the first symptom of my husband's Hyperthyroidism/Graves disease. Have you been checked out for thyroid issues? An EKG alone wouldn't spot that. That being said, you may just have a higher resting heart rate. If it hasn't bothered you up til now, it's probably not an issue.

A high resting heart rate(Tachacardia) is over 100 BPM. I was diagnosed with it last May. I had a bad issue with beta blockers( my heart rate was 35 BPM in the ER) so they gave me a calcium channel blocker. Helped a little but still was very high.

Doc suggested diet and exercise, again, this time I was serious. He was OK with the exercise as I'd had a echocardiogram the prior year and I had no structural heart issues.

Started losing with diet and eventually walking in the hills around here. I was try to keep my heartrate down to the (220-age)*.85, but at 58 there wasn't much room. Eventually I paid less attention to my HR while exercising. As I lost weight and added more exercise my RHR dropped. In May my average was 93 BPM by September it was 65! Today I seldom look at it while exercising.

Good luck, I'd check with your Doc just to be sure. I asked him about the 220-age like said prior it's just an estimate.

marebear31485 wrote: »

yirara wrote: »

marebear31485 wrote: »

I have always had a very high resting heart rate. It is almost always between 90-100. Even before I was overweight it was high. I know they give you an idea of what your heart rate should be with exercise, etc. But my heart rate during what I would consider moderate cardio sits around 150 bpm. I have had ekg's and nothing has ever been wrong with my heart, it's just always been this way. Since my heartbeat is abnormally fast should I be expects to get it higher than most people during exercise or still stick by the % thing where it's 220-your age? Anyone else have this problem??

Your resting heart rate and your maximum heart rate are not related. The first is determined by your level of fitness and other factors, the maximum heart rate is purely driven by genetics - you can train as much as you like but it doesn't change. It only goes down a bit with age. The equation you're quoting is completely useless as more people tend to be far away from the calculated value than there are close to that number. If your doctor has given you no reason to keep your working out heart rate low then just go for it. If you want to improve general fitness and be able to get better and faster then long and slow workouts are really crucial. Ignore all HR meters and train such that you're still able to talk but that you feel you did something afterwards. See if you can increase the distance by 10% each week and do a break every now and then. You might want to do fast and shorter sessions regularly as well. If you can't talk anymore then you're at the right speed

Btw, I'm a massive outlyer! My restingHR is around 45 while my max is at around 210. According to this equation it should only be 178! Imagine I tried according to this equation: It would be completely useless as I'd be walking then and not running.

My doctor was actually the one who said I needed to start exercising so I think I'm in the clear! She told me I am pre-diabetic. That was the kick in the face I needed to start getting healthier!

Go for it! I'm sure you can do it. Reducing your weight will probably have a good influence on your blood sugar levels and sleep apnea. If you want to start running then maybe look at a programme such as C25k. There is a really supportive group here. This is how I learned to run. Important: start slowly, walk as much as you need. There's no shame in doing that. You will get better in due time

You're not in a dangerous zone, but it is recommended to work toward a lower resting rate. I had a RHR of 80 for a while. I have a theory that I was chronically dehydrated because I really only drank water when I was thirsty. I recently started drinking a lot of water, exercising a lot more, and practicing yoga. I brought it from 80 to 60 over the course of maybe 4-5 months. Just practice good habits, address stress in your life, and it may come down a bit.

to be fair, the HRM on fitbits aren't meant to be used as medical devices. I wouldn't trust that. Best way is to check your pulse for fifteen seconds then times it by four to get your actual heart rate.

Colorscheme wrote: »

to be fair, the HRM on fitbits aren't meant to be used as medical devices. I wouldn't trust that. Best way is to check your pulse for fifteen seconds then times it by four to get your actual heart rate.

Polar makes a good HRM that syncs with a chest strap. I know there are others, as well. But yes, the HRMs on most 24/7 trackers are not meant to be medical devices. I'm pretty sure the ones with the wrist-based sensors are not as consistent.

You need to rely on perceived exertion (esp your breathing) to guide your workout intensity. If you want to use HR as a guide, you can just observe the number under different conditions and effort levels and develop your own "scale".

If you want to figure a heart rate target that's more accurate, use the Heart Rate Reserve method (aka Karvonen method).

First you subtract your rest HR from your age-predicted or measured Max HR. That number is your HR Reserve. Multiply HR Reserve by desired workout intensity--50%, 60%, etc. Add the result to you resting HR and that's a more accurate exercise rate.

Ex: Max HR 190, rest HR 90.
190-90=100 that's the HR Reserve.
For a 60% intensity, multiply 100 x .6 = 60
Add 60 to rest HR (90) and the 60% effort target HR is 150.

To compare: just taking a % of max HR would give a 60% target rate of 144 (190 x 60%).

Taking rest HR into account makes it more accurate. A person with the same max HR, but a resting HR of 50, would have a 60% target of 134. Noticeable difference between 150 and 134.

yirara wrote: »

nuttynanners wrote: »

Colorscheme wrote: »

to be fair, the HRM on fitbits aren't meant to be used as medical devices. I wouldn't trust that. Best way is to check your pulse for fifteen seconds then times it by four to get your actual heart rate.

Polar makes a good HRM that syncs with a chest strap. I know there are others, as well. But yes, the HRMs on most 24/7 trackers are not meant to be medical devices. I'm pretty sure the ones with the wrist-based sensors are not as consistent.

If you're interested in it, check out DCrainmaker's website. There are masses of tests. I'm having a Scosche Rhythm+ which has tested as being similar to a chest strap, and better in that it doesn't require a chest strap The author seems to prefer this little thing to all other HRMs as well.

Oooh, I have visitited DC Rainmaker before, but hadn't heard about the Scosche RHYTHM+. That is definitely a cool looking device. When I'm ready to plunk down the $$$ for a new device, I will consider that one! Thanks.