Heart Monitor Accuracy
Options
Replies
-
Sorry, missed something. To your point about it not being dangerous for healthy people to go over what they think is their max heart rate. That just means they found a closer estimate of what their true max really is.
Obviously this doesn't apply to people who've been told otherwise by their doctor.3 -
NorthCascades wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »OldAssDude wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »I go to Orangtheory and I have a heartrate monitor that I wear. Some days it appears to be accurate while other days it reading very low. I am older so I am cautious not to over do things like I did when I was younger. If my rate gets to 85% of max I usually back off a bit. I don't want to be in a zone and not know that I am there...I hope this makes sense. I do not have heart issues that I am aware of. Don't want to create any either. I am not that worried about how many steps I take or what my calorie burn is...I control calories with nutrition. Thanks to all!
heart rate zones mean nothing unless you are training for something. if you are not having issues with dizzyness,nausea,chest pain and other symptoms from heart rate being higher then you should be fine. if you dont have a heart issue then its really irrelevant and so are the zones. I know for me I never get about a certain heart rate no matter how hard I work,so I dont worry too much and I have a heart valve issue but had all kinds of testing recently and everything is fine so. but only do what you feel comfortable doing
Heart rate zones are important several reasons, from improving base aerobic fitness levels, to improving VO2max and lactate threshold.
Many runners and ultra runners use modified zones and target them for training.
How can you say it means nothing?
I specifically said that unless you ARE training for something. if you arent training it means nothing. I dont even bother most of the time to look at my heart rate. I know without looking at it how hard I am working just by how I feel. not to mention that many variables can throw off your max HR as well. things such as stress,your level of fitness (or lack of), heat,cold,etc. many people think going over your max HR is dangerous,for some it may be for others not so much.
I had an issue a few months ago where my heart rate spiked to the 170s just walking at a slow pace. my fitbit and manually checking my pulse showed it was this high. I was not going all out, I was walking maybe 2.5-3 mph not very fast ,very little exertion had palpitations from time to time also.
I had that happen for a week or so then it went back to normal(still had the palpitations off and on). saw a cardiologist,had all kinds of testing and everything is normal. have not had an issue with heart rate and the palpitation have been gone for weeks now. I have changed nothing at all.so that just proves that a heart rate zone means squat when exercising. I can do a true hiit routine and not get over 150 most of the time when I do it, and thats going all out. that number really means nothing to me though especially after the above happened.
A long time ago, humans relied on walking for days, and running for long amounts of time, for food. Also running to avoid being food. We evolved a sense of perceived exertion to help us stay alive. When your heart rate is high, you can feel it in several ways, you perceived a racing in your chest, you're gulping air down, your legs burn (or arms or whatever depending what you're doing). We have this because it works.
The hardest workout I do lately is a 20 minute power test. I don't look at my heart rate when I do it, like you. I do watch my power output though, instantaneous plus 3 second and lap averages.
no I didnt have a racing in my chest(I assume you meant me?) I was having palpitations which can come with my heart issue which is mitral valve prolapse/regurgitation. when my heart rate is high I dont feel like my heart is racing but I know its high from how I am breathing. I also dont have to gulp down air which may or may not be odd I dont know. een at 150 or higher I can carry on a convo with very little issue. I was walking and should not have had the heart rate I did . I had no symptoms that made me think it was that high(I did make another post about this) I just happened to glance at my fitbit and then take it manually because I was like theres no way its that high. it was .1 -
NorthCascades wrote: »Sorry, missed something. To your point about it not being dangerous for healthy people to go over what they think is their max heart rate. That just means they found a closer estimate of what their true max really is.
Obviously this doesn't apply to people who've been told otherwise by their doctor.
of course not if a dr says not to go over a certain point then you dont try to go over that. my nephew also has a heart issue and his dr has told him not to get his heart rate over a certain point. hes 17 and it could put him into cardiac arrest if he does.he has the type of cardiomyopathy the kind you hear about when someone is playing sports and just drops dead
1 -
NorthCascades wrote: »Sorry, missed something. To your point about it not being dangerous for healthy people to go over what they think is their max heart rate. That just means they found a closer estimate of what their true max really is.
Obviously this doesn't apply to people who've been told otherwise by their doctor.
Yes, 100%, but . . .
Just for completeness, not disagreeing: I'd still say beginner exercisers should avoid shooting for age-estimated HRmax, until they've laid down some base CV endurance/fitness. Let's not have a heart attack by trying to see if we're healthy, K? :-)7 -
OldAssDude wrote: »Unless you have had your max HR tested then your 85% could just be 85% of the wrong number.
"I don't want to be in a zone and not know that I am there...I hope this makes sense. I do not have heart issues that I am aware of. Don't want to create any either."
IMHO these are not valid concerns.
TBH your body will tell you loud and clear if you are over-doing things. Using perceived exertion is free!!
If you really want (as opposed to need) to know your HR then like @OldAssDude I've found a Garmin chest strap to be pretty reliable, conversely I've found various Polar chest straps/devices to be pretty unreliable.
I was talking about the Garmin's with the built in optical heart rate monitors. I have compared them to chest strap monitors many many times and have found them to be within a few BPM for most cardio type workouts if worn properly.
Also, perceived exertion is not bad, but people perceive things differently, and as your body adjusts to the workout the perception changes. For example when I first start running, I perceive more exertion. After my body adjusts to running, I perceive less. I would not realize that if I didn't know what my heart rate was and what zone I was in. I'm not saying perceived exertion won't work, just that it is a variable that changes. Knowing your heart rate at a glance gives a much better picture of how we perceive exertion.
If a person wants to improve their cardio fitness, the basic rule of thumb is to keep your heart in the cardio zone for a minimum of 20 to 30 minutes non-stop, and a minimum of 3 times per week, to get a minimum training effect. If you want a better training effect you should increase the time, and/or intensity (higher zone), and/or number of sessions per week.
I will also add that in order to do effective heart rate training, you need to know your true max heart rate (or as close as you can get to it), because that will determine what your zones are.
There's a formal RPE (rate of perceived exertion) scale that has physiologically-related experiential/behavioral benchmarks to it. It can be a quite useful guide for training, and may be better than zones derived from age-estimated HRmax (especially for people who have a higher max).
I'm a data geek, and know my HRmax (about 22 bpm above age estimated), but RPE would be better than age-estimated ranges for me, training-wise. Age-estimated ranges would result in severe undertraining. Not everyone knows their actual max, nor has a safe way to estimate it.
In this regard, I agree 100% (as usual
) with @sijomial.
OP, I've found my Polar chest belt and Garmin chest belt to give me very similar HR estimates. My Garmin (Vivoactive 3) wrist-based HRM does OK in daily life, but can go wonky in exercise that includes vigorous arm movement (like on-water rowing). I suspect the wrist-based monitor intermittently loses solid contact.
Knowing your HR is fun, and it helps me keep pushing myself. The lowest-cost entry point is probably a chest belt with a bit of data storage, that links to a smartphone app as a longer-term storage repository. I know Polar sells such a thing; probably others do as well.2 -
CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »NorthCascades wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »OldAssDude wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »I go to Orangtheory and I have a heartrate monitor that I wear. Some days it appears to be accurate while other days it reading very low. I am older so I am cautious not to over do things like I did when I was younger. If my rate gets to 85% of max I usually back off a bit. I don't want to be in a zone and not know that I am there...I hope this makes sense. I do not have heart issues that I am aware of. Don't want to create any either. I am not that worried about how many steps I take or what my calorie burn is...I control calories with nutrition. Thanks to all!
heart rate zones mean nothing unless you are training for something. if you are not having issues with dizzyness,nausea,chest pain and other symptoms from heart rate being higher then you should be fine. if you dont have a heart issue then its really irrelevant and so are the zones. I know for me I never get about a certain heart rate no matter how hard I work,so I dont worry too much and I have a heart valve issue but had all kinds of testing recently and everything is fine so. but only do what you feel comfortable doing
Heart rate zones are important several reasons, from improving base aerobic fitness levels, to improving VO2max and lactate threshold.
Many runners and ultra runners use modified zones and target them for training.
How can you say it means nothing?
I specifically said that unless you ARE training for something. if you arent training it means nothing. I dont even bother most of the time to look at my heart rate. I know without looking at it how hard I am working just by how I feel. not to mention that many variables can throw off your max HR as well. things such as stress,your level of fitness (or lack of), heat,cold,etc. many people think going over your max HR is dangerous,for some it may be for others not so much.
I had an issue a few months ago where my heart rate spiked to the 170s just walking at a slow pace. my fitbit and manually checking my pulse showed it was this high. I was not going all out, I was walking maybe 2.5-3 mph not very fast ,very little exertion had palpitations from time to time also.
I had that happen for a week or so then it went back to normal(still had the palpitations off and on). saw a cardiologist,had all kinds of testing and everything is normal. have not had an issue with heart rate and the palpitation have been gone for weeks now. I have changed nothing at all.so that just proves that a heart rate zone means squat when exercising. I can do a true hiit routine and not get over 150 most of the time when I do it, and thats going all out. that number really means nothing to me though especially after the above happened.
A long time ago, humans relied on walking for days, and running for long amounts of time, for food. Also running to avoid being food. We evolved a sense of perceived exertion to help us stay alive. When your heart rate is high, you can feel it in several ways, you perceived a racing in your chest, you're gulping air down, your legs burn (or arms or whatever depending what you're doing). We have this because it works.
The hardest workout I do lately is a 20 minute power test. I don't look at my heart rate when I do it, like you. I do watch my power output though, instantaneous plus 3 second and lap averages.
no I didnt have a racing in my chest(I assume you meant me?) I was having palpitations which can come with my heart issue which is mitral valve prolapse/regurgitation. when my heart rate is high I dont feel like my heart is racing but I know its high from how I am breathing. I also dont have to gulp down air which may or may not be odd I dont know. een at 150 or higher I can carry on a convo with very little issue. I was walking and should not have had the heart rate I did . I had no symptoms that made me think it was that high(I did make another post about this) I just happened to glance at my fitbit and then take it manually because I was like theres no way its that high. it was .
I think he meant "you" as in "general you" not you specifically. I could be wrong though.3 -
CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »NorthCascades wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »OldAssDude wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »I go to Orangtheory and I have a heartrate monitor that I wear. Some days it appears to be accurate while other days it reading very low. I am older so I am cautious not to over do things like I did when I was younger. If my rate gets to 85% of max I usually back off a bit. I don't want to be in a zone and not know that I am there...I hope this makes sense. I do not have heart issues that I am aware of. Don't want to create any either. I am not that worried about how many steps I take or what my calorie burn is...I control calories with nutrition. Thanks to all!
heart rate zones mean nothing unless you are training for something. if you are not having issues with dizzyness,nausea,chest pain and other symptoms from heart rate being higher then you should be fine. if you dont have a heart issue then its really irrelevant and so are the zones. I know for me I never get about a certain heart rate no matter how hard I work,so I dont worry too much and I have a heart valve issue but had all kinds of testing recently and everything is fine so. but only do what you feel comfortable doing
Heart rate zones are important several reasons, from improving base aerobic fitness levels, to improving VO2max and lactate threshold.
Many runners and ultra runners use modified zones and target them for training.
How can you say it means nothing?
I specifically said that unless you ARE training for something. if you arent training it means nothing. I dont even bother most of the time to look at my heart rate. I know without looking at it how hard I am working just by how I feel. not to mention that many variables can throw off your max HR as well. things such as stress,your level of fitness (or lack of), heat,cold,etc. many people think going over your max HR is dangerous,for some it may be for others not so much.
I had an issue a few months ago where my heart rate spiked to the 170s just walking at a slow pace. my fitbit and manually checking my pulse showed it was this high. I was not going all out, I was walking maybe 2.5-3 mph not very fast ,very little exertion had palpitations from time to time also.
I had that happen for a week or so then it went back to normal(still had the palpitations off and on). saw a cardiologist,had all kinds of testing and everything is normal. have not had an issue with heart rate and the palpitation have been gone for weeks now. I have changed nothing at all.so that just proves that a heart rate zone means squat when exercising. I can do a true hiit routine and not get over 150 most of the time when I do it, and thats going all out. that number really means nothing to me though especially after the above happened.
A long time ago, humans relied on walking for days, and running for long amounts of time, for food. Also running to avoid being food. We evolved a sense of perceived exertion to help us stay alive. When your heart rate is high, you can feel it in several ways, you perceived a racing in your chest, you're gulping air down, your legs burn (or arms or whatever depending what you're doing). We have this because it works.
The hardest workout I do lately is a 20 minute power test. I don't look at my heart rate when I do it, like you. I do watch my power output though, instantaneous plus 3 second and lap averages.
no I didnt have a racing in my chest(I assume you meant me?) I was having palpitations which can come with my heart issue which is mitral valve prolapse/regurgitation. when my heart rate is high I dont feel like my heart is racing but I know its high from how I am breathing. I also dont have to gulp down air which may or may not be odd I dont know. een at 150 or higher I can carry on a convo with very little issue. I was walking and should not have had the heart rate I did . I had no symptoms that made me think it was that high(I did make another post about this) I just happened to glance at my fitbit and then take it manually because I was like theres no way its that high. it was .
Sorry, I didn't mean you in particular. I was agreeing with and expanding on your point about being able to exercise effectively without knowing the specific number of bpm, because you (the royal you) can ballpark your intensity level.
On a more personal level, it sounds like your fitness is pretty good too bed able to carry on a conversation at 150 bpm. When I'm on a bike, 155 bpm means I'm suffering. 1 -
I agree that RPE is a valuable guide. Using the Borg RPE scale (which goes from 6 to 20), I did a 5K run today that was about a 13 on the scale ("somewhat hard exercise, but feels OK to continue"). I was pushing myself a bit, but wasn't out of breath or excessively fatigued. My average HR for the run was 154, but hit a max of 171. My age-estimated HRmax is 164, so that would mean I was basically redlining throughout my run, but RPE says otherwise. I haven't had my HRmax tested, but it's obviously somewhere above age estimated. Garmin had me in Zone 5 and at average 88% HRmax for the run, but it didn't feel anything like that by RPE.There's a formal RPE (rate of perceived exertion) scale that has physiologically-related experiential/behavioral benchmarks to it. It can be a quite useful guide for training, and may be better than zones derived from age-estimated HRmax (especially for people who have a higher max).
I'm a data geek, and know my HRmax (about 22 bpm above age estimated), but RPE would be better than age-estimated ranges for me, training-wise. Age-estimated ranges would result in severe undertraining. Not everyone knows their actual max, nor has a safe way to estimate it.
In this regard, I agree 100% (as usual ) with @sijomial.
My experience with wrist-based optical HR matches with yours and differs from OldAssDude. My FR935 does great with HR when I'm at rest/lightly active, but is wonky when running, worse when cycling, and absolutely useless in the weight room. I always pair it with a Scosche Rhythm+ band when I run or cycle, because the optical HR at the wrist is too unreliable to count on (I couldn't care less about HR when lifting weights, so I don't even bother with it in the gym). I've tried wearing it higher and lower on my wrist, looser and tighter, even on the inside of my wrist, but it's just never been reliable for me. In virtually all of DCRainmaker's reviews, he says that optical HR has different degrees of success for different people, depending upon several variables. I guess I'm one that it doesn't work for, at least during exercise.OP, I've found my Polar chest belt and Garmin chest belt to give me very similar HR estimates. My Garmin (Vivoactive 3) wrist-based HRM does OK in daily life, but can go wonky in exercise that includes vigorous arm movement (like on-water rowing). I suspect the wrist-based monitor intermittently loses solid contact.1 -
NorthCascades wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »NorthCascades wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »OldAssDude wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »I go to Orangtheory and I have a heartrate monitor that I wear. Some days it appears to be accurate while other days it reading very low. I am older so I am cautious not to over do things like I did when I was younger. If my rate gets to 85% of max I usually back off a bit. I don't want to be in a zone and not know that I am there...I hope this makes sense. I do not have heart issues that I am aware of. Don't want to create any either. I am not that worried about how many steps I take or what my calorie burn is...I control calories with nutrition. Thanks to all!
heart rate zones mean nothing unless you are training for something. if you are not having issues with dizzyness,nausea,chest pain and other symptoms from heart rate being higher then you should be fine. if you dont have a heart issue then its really irrelevant and so are the zones. I know for me I never get about a certain heart rate no matter how hard I work,so I dont worry too much and I have a heart valve issue but had all kinds of testing recently and everything is fine so. but only do what you feel comfortable doing
Heart rate zones are important several reasons, from improving base aerobic fitness levels, to improving VO2max and lactate threshold.
Many runners and ultra runners use modified zones and target them for training.
How can you say it means nothing?
I specifically said that unless you ARE training for something. if you arent training it means nothing. I dont even bother most of the time to look at my heart rate. I know without looking at it how hard I am working just by how I feel. not to mention that many variables can throw off your max HR as well. things such as stress,your level of fitness (or lack of), heat,cold,etc. many people think going over your max HR is dangerous,for some it may be for others not so much.
I had an issue a few months ago where my heart rate spiked to the 170s just walking at a slow pace. my fitbit and manually checking my pulse showed it was this high. I was not going all out, I was walking maybe 2.5-3 mph not very fast ,very little exertion had palpitations from time to time also.
I had that happen for a week or so then it went back to normal(still had the palpitations off and on). saw a cardiologist,had all kinds of testing and everything is normal. have not had an issue with heart rate and the palpitation have been gone for weeks now. I have changed nothing at all.so that just proves that a heart rate zone means squat when exercising. I can do a true hiit routine and not get over 150 most of the time when I do it, and thats going all out. that number really means nothing to me though especially after the above happened.
A long time ago, humans relied on walking for days, and running for long amounts of time, for food. Also running to avoid being food. We evolved a sense of perceived exertion to help us stay alive. When your heart rate is high, you can feel it in several ways, you perceived a racing in your chest, you're gulping air down, your legs burn (or arms or whatever depending what you're doing). We have this because it works.
The hardest workout I do lately is a 20 minute power test. I don't look at my heart rate when I do it, like you. I do watch my power output though, instantaneous plus 3 second and lap averages.
no I didnt have a racing in my chest(I assume you meant me?) I was having palpitations which can come with my heart issue which is mitral valve prolapse/regurgitation. when my heart rate is high I dont feel like my heart is racing but I know its high from how I am breathing. I also dont have to gulp down air which may or may not be odd I dont know. een at 150 or higher I can carry on a convo with very little issue. I was walking and should not have had the heart rate I did . I had no symptoms that made me think it was that high(I did make another post about this) I just happened to glance at my fitbit and then take it manually because I was like theres no way its that high. it was .
Sorry, I didn't mean you in particular. I was agreeing with and expanding on your point about being able to exercise effectively without knowing the specific number of bpm, because you (the royal you) can ballpark your intensity level.
On a more personal level, it sounds like your fitness is pretty good too bed able to carry on a conversation at 150 bpm. When I'm on a bike, 155 bpm means I'm suffering.
I think the whole thing of being conversational at a certain heart rate might have bearing on where it is relative to your base resting heart rate. I'm conversational at 150 as well, and I'm far from an athlete. My resting HR is around 63.2 -
NorthCascades wrote: »Sorry, missed something. To your point about it not being dangerous for healthy people to go over what they think is their max heart rate. That just means they found a closer estimate of what their true max really is.
Obviously this doesn't apply to people who've been told otherwise by their doctor.
Yes, 100%, but . . .
Just for completeness, not disagreeing: I'd still say beginner exercisers should avoid shooting for age-estimated HRmax, until they've laid down some base CV endurance/fitness. Let's not have a heart attack by trying to see if we're healthy, K? :-)
It's such a great irony about "the fat burning zone." There are so many benefits especially for new exercisers of working out at a moderate intensity. People build their fitness and endurance this way, there's generally less risk of injury, you can do it longer if you wish, way less recovery involved which means you can do it more often too.
So don't fear a particular heart rate if you don't have a good reason to, but definitely don't go trying to hit your max in the beginning either.5 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »I think the whole thing of being conversational at a certain heart rate might have bearing on where it is relative to your base resting heart rate. I'm conversational at 150 as well, and I'm far from an athlete. My resting HR is around 63.
I'm conversational (in short sentences) at 150 while running. 150 on the bike is pushing it and feels harder than 150 while running (far from an athlete here also). My resting HR is around 50.
As a side conversation: I have much more granular control of my HR when riding than I do while running. On the bike I can easily choose to ride at 120 bpm (just to pull a number out of the air) and keep it there (within around 5 bpm either way), as long as there are no big hills. If I choose to go up to 130, or 150, I can easily do that. When running, it's more I just set a comfortable pace and my HR does what it does. If I'm trying to keep my HR down while running, there comes a point where running any slower just feels harder and takes more effort. It's basically impossible for me to run at a HR below around 130, and if I drop to walking, my HR will drop down to 100-105.0 -
NorthCascades wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »NorthCascades wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »OldAssDude wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »I go to Orangtheory and I have a heartrate monitor that I wear. Some days it appears to be accurate while other days it reading very low. I am older so I am cautious not to over do things like I did when I was younger. If my rate gets to 85% of max I usually back off a bit. I don't want to be in a zone and not know that I am there...I hope this makes sense. I do not have heart issues that I am aware of. Don't want to create any either. I am not that worried about how many steps I take or what my calorie burn is...I control calories with nutrition. Thanks to all!
heart rate zones mean nothing unless you are training for something. if you are not having issues with dizzyness,nausea,chest pain and other symptoms from heart rate being higher then you should be fine. if you dont have a heart issue then its really irrelevant and so are the zones. I know for me I never get about a certain heart rate no matter how hard I work,so I dont worry too much and I have a heart valve issue but had all kinds of testing recently and everything is fine so. but only do what you feel comfortable doing
Heart rate zones are important several reasons, from improving base aerobic fitness levels, to improving VO2max and lactate threshold.
Many runners and ultra runners use modified zones and target them for training.
How can you say it means nothing?
I specifically said that unless you ARE training for something. if you arent training it means nothing. I dont even bother most of the time to look at my heart rate. I know without looking at it how hard I am working just by how I feel. not to mention that many variables can throw off your max HR as well. things such as stress,your level of fitness (or lack of), heat,cold,etc. many people think going over your max HR is dangerous,for some it may be for others not so much.
I had an issue a few months ago where my heart rate spiked to the 170s just walking at a slow pace. my fitbit and manually checking my pulse showed it was this high. I was not going all out, I was walking maybe 2.5-3 mph not very fast ,very little exertion had palpitations from time to time also.
I had that happen for a week or so then it went back to normal(still had the palpitations off and on). saw a cardiologist,had all kinds of testing and everything is normal. have not had an issue with heart rate and the palpitation have been gone for weeks now. I have changed nothing at all.so that just proves that a heart rate zone means squat when exercising. I can do a true hiit routine and not get over 150 most of the time when I do it, and thats going all out. that number really means nothing to me though especially after the above happened.
A long time ago, humans relied on walking for days, and running for long amounts of time, for food. Also running to avoid being food. We evolved a sense of perceived exertion to help us stay alive. When your heart rate is high, you can feel it in several ways, you perceived a racing in your chest, you're gulping air down, your legs burn (or arms or whatever depending what you're doing). We have this because it works.
The hardest workout I do lately is a 20 minute power test. I don't look at my heart rate when I do it, like you. I do watch my power output though, instantaneous plus 3 second and lap averages.
no I didnt have a racing in my chest(I assume you meant me?) I was having palpitations which can come with my heart issue which is mitral valve prolapse/regurgitation. when my heart rate is high I dont feel like my heart is racing but I know its high from how I am breathing. I also dont have to gulp down air which may or may not be odd I dont know. een at 150 or higher I can carry on a convo with very little issue. I was walking and should not have had the heart rate I did . I had no symptoms that made me think it was that high(I did make another post about this) I just happened to glance at my fitbit and then take it manually because I was like theres no way its that high. it was .
Sorry, I didn't mean you in particular. I was agreeing with and expanding on your point about being able to exercise effectively without knowing the specific number of bpm, because you (the royal you) can ballpark your intensity level.
On a more personal level, it sounds like your fitness is pretty good too bed able to carry on a conversation at 150 bpm. When I'm on a bike, 155 bpm means I'm suffering.
I dont know, you would think my fitness is pretty good. I dont think it is(maybe its just me) but maybe its all the years of having issues with my asthma(numerous attacks a night as a kid and young adult) and learning how to cope with a hard time breathing and having a higher heart rate??? (asthma attacks would have heart rates into the 150s-160s and the drs could not believe I could still able to speak,I know it has nothing to do with exercise per se). I did improve my lung function quite a bit in the last 5 years. I dont need half the meds I needed years ago when I was lighter and at a healthy weight.so that could be part of it. my resting heart rate is usually 55-65bpm when Im more active. lately its been in the 70s but having sinus and allergy issues could be the cause of that.
all I know is I can do more at a heavier weight now that I couldnt do at a lighter weight then.2 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »I think the whole thing of being conversational at a certain heart rate might have bearing on where it is relative to your base resting heart rate. I'm conversational at 150 as well, and I'm far from an athlete. My resting HR is around 63.
I'm conversational (in short sentences) at 150 while running. 150 on the bike is pushing it and feels harder than 150 while running (far from an athlete here also). My resting HR is around 50.
As a side conversation: I have much more granular control of my HR when riding than I do while running. On the bike I can easily choose to ride at 120 bpm (just to pull a number out of the air) and keep it there (within around 5 bpm either way), as long as there are no big hills. If I choose to go up to 130, or 150, I can easily do that. When running, it's more I just set a comfortable pace and my HR does what it does. If I'm trying to keep my HR down while running, there comes a point where running any slower just feels harder and takes more effort. It's basically impossible for me to run at a HR below around 130, and if I drop to walking, my HR will drop down to 100-105.
I think the difference is that running is weight bearing compared to riding.
The same thing happens to me if i try running slower too at below about 130.
In addition, when i first start running and hit zone 3, a can not hold a conversation more that a few words. Once my body adjusts to running, that goes away and i can converse (in short sentences) until i start getting into the higher end of zone 4. 150 to me is zone 5 (could maybe get 1 or 2 words out) because i'm 61 years old. My MHR (according to the 220-age formula) is 159, but i have gotten my HR up to 165 using a chest strap enough times to be confident that my true MHR is about 165. So that's what i have it set to now. I was thinking about setting 5 higher because it was recommended to me by an ultra runner in another forum. He said you should set your MHR 5 higher than your highest measured heart rate.
Also i do go by perceived exertion too, but i like to know what my heart rate is doing at the same time.0 -
As a side conversation: I have much more granular control of my HR when riding than I do while running. On the bike I can easily choose to ride at 120 bpm (just to pull a number out of the air) and keep it there (within around 5 bpm either way), as long as there are no big hills. If I choose to go up to 130, or 150, I can easily do that. When running, it's more I just set a comfortable pace and my HR does what it does. If I'm trying to keep my HR down while running, there comes a point where running any slower just feels harder and takes more effort. It's basically impossible for me to run at a HR below around 130, and if I drop to walking, my HR will drop down to 100-105.
So true, that most efficient running pace just feels better.
When recovering from my ankle breaks years ago I had fun experimenting on treadmill as pace was increasing, messing with cadence and pace and watching HR for changes indicating better form. I think I nailed the turn-over and slowest pace that gave best results.
Now when I'm coming out of winter with little running, I prefer to do the run/walk intervals just so I can have the run at that best pace, and since I can't sustain it yet, walk recover helps to still do a fair time or distance.
Eventually the system catches up to maintain longer. Though now I appreciate the run/walk just for saving the knees during training at longer distances.1 -
i found my vivosmart was accurate in comparison to the doctor's and a chest strap when running on a treadmill. my vivoactive has not yet been tested0
-
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »NorthCascades wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »NorthCascades wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »OldAssDude wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »I go to Orangtheory and I have a heartrate monitor that I wear. Some days it appears to be accurate while other days it reading very low. I am older so I am cautious not to over do things like I did when I was younger. If my rate gets to 85% of max I usually back off a bit. I don't want to be in a zone and not know that I am there...I hope this makes sense. I do not have heart issues that I am aware of. Don't want to create any either. I am not that worried about how many steps I take or what my calorie burn is...I control calories with nutrition. Thanks to all!
heart rate zones mean nothing unless you are training for something. if you are not having issues with dizzyness,nausea,chest pain and other symptoms from heart rate being higher then you should be fine. if you dont have a heart issue then its really irrelevant and so are the zones. I know for me I never get about a certain heart rate no matter how hard I work,so I dont worry too much and I have a heart valve issue but had all kinds of testing recently and everything is fine so. but only do what you feel comfortable doing
Heart rate zones are important several reasons, from improving base aerobic fitness levels, to improving VO2max and lactate threshold.
Many runners and ultra runners use modified zones and target them for training.
How can you say it means nothing?
I specifically said that unless you ARE training for something. if you arent training it means nothing. I dont even bother most of the time to look at my heart rate. I know without looking at it how hard I am working just by how I feel. not to mention that many variables can throw off your max HR as well. things such as stress,your level of fitness (or lack of), heat,cold,etc. many people think going over your max HR is dangerous,for some it may be for others not so much.
I had an issue a few months ago where my heart rate spiked to the 170s just walking at a slow pace. my fitbit and manually checking my pulse showed it was this high. I was not going all out, I was walking maybe 2.5-3 mph not very fast ,very little exertion had palpitations from time to time also.
I had that happen for a week or so then it went back to normal(still had the palpitations off and on). saw a cardiologist,had all kinds of testing and everything is normal. have not had an issue with heart rate and the palpitation have been gone for weeks now. I have changed nothing at all.so that just proves that a heart rate zone means squat when exercising. I can do a true hiit routine and not get over 150 most of the time when I do it, and thats going all out. that number really means nothing to me though especially after the above happened.
A long time ago, humans relied on walking for days, and running for long amounts of time, for food. Also running to avoid being food. We evolved a sense of perceived exertion to help us stay alive. When your heart rate is high, you can feel it in several ways, you perceived a racing in your chest, you're gulping air down, your legs burn (or arms or whatever depending what you're doing). We have this because it works.
The hardest workout I do lately is a 20 minute power test. I don't look at my heart rate when I do it, like you. I do watch my power output though, instantaneous plus 3 second and lap averages.
no I didnt have a racing in my chest(I assume you meant me?) I was having palpitations which can come with my heart issue which is mitral valve prolapse/regurgitation. when my heart rate is high I dont feel like my heart is racing but I know its high from how I am breathing. I also dont have to gulp down air which may or may not be odd I dont know. een at 150 or higher I can carry on a convo with very little issue. I was walking and should not have had the heart rate I did . I had no symptoms that made me think it was that high(I did make another post about this) I just happened to glance at my fitbit and then take it manually because I was like theres no way its that high. it was .
Sorry, I didn't mean you in particular. I was agreeing with and expanding on your point about being able to exercise effectively without knowing the specific number of bpm, because you (the royal you) can ballpark your intensity level.
On a more personal level, it sounds like your fitness is pretty good too bed able to carry on a conversation at 150 bpm. When I'm on a bike, 155 bpm means I'm suffering.
I think the whole thing of being conversational at a certain heart rate might have bearing on where it is relative to your base resting heart rate. I'm conversational at 150 as well, and I'm far from an athlete. My resting HR is around 63.
In my understanding (which may be incorrect), for training purposes it's more helpful to calculate heart rate ranges based on heart rate reserve (HRR), the formula for which uses your resting (RHR) and true max rates to calculate percentages within your actual useful range, rather than simply calculating heart rate ranges based on pure percent of HRmax. In that HRR context, both RHR and HRmax are meaningful in determining training guidance, in line with your subjective perception.
That said, random fun fact: Ability to talk (I won't go as far as "converse") during high intensity effort is a skill one can refine (I won't go as far as "perfect").
I frequently row bow in a double or quad (because I'm a low anxiety person ), and the bow rower is responsible for steering: She is looking over her shoulder for a clear line (we face the stern) and yells steering commands to the other rowers. If you can't do that at race pace and its relevant heart rate (i.e., as close to AT as you can sustain for the duration), your boat gets penalized/DQed in races for going outside its lane, or you hit things during practice. It's more of a party trick than the minimum required skill, but I can get out full sentences at loud volume, even when up around AT. (The actual rowing steering commands are short phrases, not full sentences. The motivational or technical-correction comments that are occasionally necessary can be sentences.) 1 -
That's what makes the HRR method nicer too - even if you have only a decently estimated HRmax - you should at least have a valid restingHR to get decent zones.
And maybe this site will come back that had nice calc with several different options for the HRmax side, and zones using HRR and nice explanation. Perhaps some funding problems right now.
http://www.calculatenow.biz/sport/heart.php?
There is a VO2max estimate method that uses restingHR too, Polar used it (perhaps still does) on their nicer devices when doing the self-test.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00421-003-0988-y
Can get zones based on VO2max estimate also.
And off Anaerobic / Lactate Threshold which I always preferred. Self-test can estimate that well enough.
If really wanting to train for some specific function anyway.
@AnnPT77 - I'll bet you have a very high AT/LT which throws off other zone estimates.0 -
(great content snipped by responder)
@AnnPT77 - I'll bet you have a very high AT/LT which throws off other zone estimates.
:flowerforyou: I'd like to think that . HRmax is well above age-estimated (around 180 vs. 158), but I calculate zones off the measured HRmax so I'm looking at estimated AT by HRR method based on measured max/resting. (If I used age-estimated max, I could maybe sing at that lower so-called "AT" - LOL.)
Either way, there are practice/skill aspects to talking at high HR, though, I'm convinced. Rowing ideally requires very structured breathing within the constraints of the strokes. One can talk more, louder, and in bigger phrases by managing the exhale well/functionally. It has a slight performance cost if one has to talk a lot, but practice helps. Subjectively, the performance penalty from the cognitive demand of steering is higher than the performance penalty from the physical talking, I think.
But now I'm way off topic. 0 -
My FitBit Ionic is pretty dead on, and usually matches my (counted) pulse rate within 2 bpm.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 403 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 999 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions