High resting heart rate
Options
Replies
-
marebear31485 wrote: »dawniemate wrote: »I'm 48 female and my heart rate goes to 190bpm when doing cardio. I was concerned and got it checked out . The hospital said it's fine.
if you are worried though get it checked, 
Thanks! I'm not too concerned about it, I think if it was a problem a doctor would have said something by now! I've actually been turned away at times to donate blood because they won't take you if your heart rate is over 100. I have to put myself in a serious relaxation state before going in. I am just not sure how or if this would affect my weight loss at any point. My heart rate doesn't seem to go up as much as most people's. It's not like yours where it gets to 190. It sticks pretty steady around 150. Maybe 160 if it is a really hard workout. But that's only 50% above my normal rate.
My boyfriend has gotten turned away from the Plasma center countless times. He has a high resting heart rate to begin with and sometimes he gets nervous when they are taking his pulse, so his heart rate spikes too high. He has to sit in the waiting area and meditate every time we've been.
My resting heart rate, when I've been in good shape, is usually between 60-70 bpm. I do high intensity circuit training, so I can do shorter sessions of like 30 minutes, but my heart rate is between 150-185 the whole time and I'm dripping sweat. I wear a heart rate monitor that helps me to know exactly hard I'm working while working out. If I start feeling like I am going to die, I know to cool it down to the 150s until I am ready to go hard again on the higher end of my max heart rate. It's a handy tool for me.0 -
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.1
-
im siting down at the computer chair at 320 lbs , 5-9 tall, 53 years old and my fit bit surge is stating my hr is 64- 65 bpm
0 -
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.0
-
My RHR was consistenly 99 for a long time, until I started really working out again. Now when I wake up, it's usually down in the low 70's. The more fit you get, the more efficient your heart works, so it should come down with cardio.0
-
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.0 -
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.
1 -
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 134.0 -
Well, right before I started losing weight, my resting heart rate was about 80, fairly consistently.
During my last year of weight loss my resting heart rate has seemed to be 50-60...a nutritionist very recently told me that's likely from being in a caloric deficit for so long..it's likely low as a means for my body to conserve energy.
Right now it's 65, and as I've been eating more calories this last week, that seems to support the theory.
This is the extent of my experience with resting heart rates
0 -
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.0 -
I have tachycardia. Even when I was thin, and very active my resting was always 100. My doctor thinks it may have been from having scarlettfever twice as a child-which is when the tachycardia began. Now I am on beta blockers because now that I am over weight my resting is 135ish (w/o beta blockers), and during my workouts it tends to be 180-200 w/o beta blockers, I'm around 100 resting now while on medication and 160-180 working out now.0
-
I have a Fitbit surge and have found it to be accurate compared to the hrm they use at the blood bank.
But I don't use it to guide my exercise, I look at it afterwards. I have found that for me an extra push for speed can dramatically affect how far I can run (not linear). I use breathing/effort as a guide.
Like many have said my resting heart rate has improved with exercise and also seen an increase in heart rate i can achieve and sustain during exercise.1 -
I don't have a high resting heart rate. But, the formula for max heart rate is not even close to being accurate for me. It's one of the main reasons I scoff at the idea of using a heart rate monitor for determining calorie burns from exercise. According to the formula, my max should be 184. But, when I run at what I would call moderate effort, my heart rate is easily around 177 and I've seen it get to 199 when I am doing higher intensity.
Using Google, you can find tons of articles about how the formula is not accurate. Read this one from the NY Times:nytimes.com/2001/04/24/health/maximum-heart-rate-theory-is-challenged.html?pagewanted=all
0 -
I don't have a high resting heart rate. But, the formula for max heart rate is not even close to being accurate for me. It's one of the main reasons I scoff at the idea of using a heart rate monitor for determining calorie burns from exercise. According to the formula, my max should be 184. But, when I run at what I would call moderate effort, my heart rate is easily around 177 and I've seen it get to 199 when I am doing higher intensity.
Using Google, you can find tons of articles about how the formula is not accurate. Read this one from the NY Times:nytimes.com/2001/04/24/health/maximum-heart-rate-theory-is-challenged.html?pagewanted=all
Side note: A good heart rate monitor will allow you to set your actual maximum. From a max test, my heart rate max is 181. The (outdated) 220 - age formula would give me an estimate of 160; using that would seriously compromise my training's effectiveness. But I have no problem setting my Polar HRM to use my actual max.
Some heart rate monitors will even help you run a test to estimate your actual max.0 -
As you are an outlier in terms of your resting HR you may well also be an outlier in terms of estimating max HR (220 - age is a very rough approximation only) and exercise HR.
Suggest you just go by perceived effort rather than HR for your exercise.
You could do a max HR test but suggest you do that only after getting fit - it's very taxing.
I'm an outlier for min HR (48 - 50bpm) and my tested max HR was 176 when the formula would have given 165bpm.
PS
Using a basic heart rate monitor for calorie estimates would be very misleading for you!
This is what my Dr has told me.
Im 32 and a runner. I run half marathons a couple times a year and run very regularly. My resting heart rate (taken before getting out of bed), is usually around 98. During a moderate effort run (where i can talk normally), it gets to around 170...and if I do HIIT, and really push it...I've seen 194 before.
My dr is not concerned. Ive had some testing done and Im healthy and good to go.
Ive lost 75#, so it hasnt impacted my weight loss over the last 15ish months.0 -
Colorscheme wrote: »I have a high resting heart rate. Like, 120 or so. I have palpitations and pvc's and I also have an extra electrical pathway that had to be ablated with surgery. I also have POTS. I had numerous normal ekg's, it was only when I had an implanted device in my chest that the doc saw what was really wrong. I've been seeing a cardio the last eight years and always will have to as well as take beta blockers.
If you think something is off then I suggest to see a doctor.
My electrophsyilogist also used the 220 minus age rule and he said my heart rate was in the upper limit of normal, but when he did the EP study my hr was in the high 200s, about 280 bpm. [They provoke rhythms on purpose, it's controlled] and that confirmed the extra pathway.
Wolff Parkinson White?0 -
A resting HR between 60-100 in a normal sinus rhythm is generally not an issue as long as there are no symptoms and no other health conditions such as congestive heart failure or anemia. HRs can also be elevated due to caffeine, anxiety, and dehydration. For those HRs on the high end of normal, doctors will most likely just recommend exercise. The more you workout, the lower your resting HR will be. Conditioned athletes will often times have resting HRs in the 40s. If exercise doesn't bring any changes, the doctor may further assess the situation. It's ALWAYS important to see your doctor if you have any concerns. Better safe than sorry.
I have Wolff Parkinson White where I have an extra electrical pathway that can cause rapid and irregular heart rates. I kept having shortness of breath and I could feel my heart racing. I was blown off and told it was just anxiety until I refused to leave the emergency room and demanded they further looked into it. That's how I found out I even had Wolff Parkinson White. My resting HR was 110-120. When I would run, my heart rate would hit 190. I am currently taking a beta blocker for it so my heart rate now stays around the 70-80s at rest. When working out my HR now won't go above the 150s. I am doing an ablation to permanently correct the problem (as long as there are no complications) and then I can get off the medication.0 -
A resting HR between 60-100 in a normal sinus rhythm is generally not an issue as long as there are no symptoms and no other health conditions such as congestive heart failure or anemia. HRs can also be elevated due to caffeine, anxiety, and dehydration. For those HRs on the high end of normal, doctors will most likely just recommend exercise. The more you workout, the lower your resting HR will be. Conditioned athletes will often times have resting HRs in the 40s. If exercise doesn't bring any changes, the doctor may further assess the situation. It's ALWAYS important to see your doctor if you have any concerns. Better safe than sorry.
I have Wolff Parkinson White where I have an extra electrical pathway that can cause rapid and irregular heart rates. I kept having shortness of breath and I could feel my heart racing. I was blown off and told it was just anxiety until I refused to leave the emergency room and demanded they further looked into it. That's how I found out I even had Wolff Parkinson White. My resting HR was 110-120. When I would run, my heart rate would hit 190. I am currently taking a beta blocker for it so my heart rate now stays around the 70-80s at rest. When working out my HR now won't go above the 150s. I am doing an ablation to permanently correct the problem (as long as there are no complications) and then I can get off the medication.
Good luck with the ablation. My mother had a fast heartbeat due to some childhood illness. I remember days when she'd be laying in bed completely exhausted from it beating so fast. I could see her chest rising with every beat. Scarey. She has had ablation and countless other procedures over the years.0 -
I don't have a high resting heart rate. But, the formula for max heart rate is not even close to being accurate for me. It's one of the main reasons I scoff at the idea of using a heart rate monitor for determining calorie burns from exercise. According to the formula, my max should be 184. But, when I run at what I would call moderate effort, my heart rate is easily around 177 and I've seen it get to 199 when I am doing higher intensity.
Using Google, you can find tons of articles about how the formula is not accurate. Read this one from the NY Times:nytimes.com/2001/04/24/health/maximum-heart-rate-theory-is-challenged.html?pagewanted=all
Side note: A good heart rate monitor will allow you to set your actual maximum. From a max test, my heart rate max is 181. The (outdated) 220 - age formula would give me an estimate of 160; using that would seriously compromise my training's effectiveness. But I have no problem setting my Polar HRM to use my actual max.
Some heart rate monitors will even help you run a test to estimate your actual max.
Yes, I could change the max, but I have no idea what my max is and really don't care. I don't have a way to run a test and no need to go to a doctor for one. So, to me, it is not useful information.
From the article I posted:
"Dr. Fritz Hagerman, an exercise physiologist at Ohio University, said he had learned from more than three decades of studying world class rowers that the whole idea of a formula to predict an individual's maximum heart rate was ludicrous. Even sillier, he said, is the common notion that the heart rate is an indication of fitness.
Some people get blood to their muscles by pushing out large amounts every time their hearts contract, he said. Others accomplish the same thing by contracting their hearts at fast rates. As a result, Dr. Hagerman said, he has seen Olympic rowers in their 20's with maximum heart rates of 220. And he has seen others on the same team and with the same ability, but who get blood to their tissues by pumping hard, with maximum rates of just 160."
My approach is to exercise based on perceived exertion and ignore calories burned. I raised my base calories for nutrition to compensate. It seems to work for me, but I know my method isn't the way most people do things.
*edited to fix quote0 -
Colorscheme wrote: »I have a high resting heart rate. Like, 120 or so. I have palpitations and pvc's and I also have an extra electrical pathway that had to be ablated with surgery. I also have POTS. I had numerous normal ekg's, it was only when I had an implanted device in my chest that the doc saw what was really wrong. I've been seeing a cardio the last eight years and always will have to as well as take beta blockers.
If you think something is off then I suggest to see a doctor.
My electrophsyilogist also used the 220 minus age rule and he said my heart rate was in the upper limit of normal, but when he did the EP study my hr was in the high 200s, about 280 bpm. [They provoke rhythms on purpose, it's controlled] and that confirmed the extra pathway.
Wolff Parkinson White?
AVNRT, actually. For whatever reason, the countless holter's and EKG's and thirty day monitors never caught it, but the implanted loop recorder did. I had it implanted after an episode of ventricular tachycardia.
Good luck with the ablation, it's tough. You will feel icky afterward. I had chest pain for 2 weeks, utter fatigue [couldn't do ANYTHING], and it was extremely painful laying flat on the back for eight hours. I also had my catheter sites bleed so the nurses had to put sand bags on my leg to put pressure on it.
That said, after two weeks i felt mostly normal and that was it. I still need beta blockers for POTS but oh well.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.7K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 394 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 943 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions