RE: Re: Maximum Heart Rate can change

[Guest guest]

Once again that sounds like trying to micromanage based

on a difficult to measure and perhaps not well

defined metric.

I suspect the " rules " offered for exercising as a

percentage of max heart rate are also estimates or

approximations based on a diverse population. Even

if you could measure your max hrt to a few decimal

points the exercise levels you target based on that

information may not enjoy much precision.

I have outlived several HRT monitors but am not in

a hurry to replace my last. I even own a fancy

treadmill that can regulate speed based on hrt but

I don't use that function since my personal pattern

of HRT doesn't agree well with their control algorithms

(at least the rates I tried). My personal HRT tends

to over respond in early stage exercise, only settling

down to a more normal ramp pattern after 15 minutes of

continuous effort. This pattern serves me well for sports

(like pick-up basketball) and doesn't seen to compromise

my performance otherwise. I suspect I could mitigate this

initial response by warming up a lot longer but I'm not

motivated to add tens of minutes warming up to my workouts.

I just start out slowly and save my kick for the end,

where it should be anyhow.

Relax, exercise should be fun. Running is a good time

to clear your head and enjoy nature (as much as one can

enjoy running outdoors, in July, in MS). I don't find

a little beeping micro-computer on my wrist very relaxing.

Be well... all things in moderation. Physical stress Si,

mental stress, no!

JR

PS: I just connected a very old unresolved data point. Many

years ago while I was at the time participating in

half-marathons I surprisingly failed an aerobic fitness

assessment at my local health club. At the time I wrote it

off to being tested on an exercise bike since I only trained

as a runner, but in hindsight I suspect they read my aggressive

early HRT response as a marker for low aerobic fitness. hmmmm

-----Original Message-----

From:

[mailto: ]On Behalf Of Diane Walter

Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 12:21 PM

Subject: [ ] Re: Maximum Heart Rate can change

I've been searching for articles about MHR and whether it can change,

but can't find scientific material. All I can find are " fitness "

articles, which are suspect, IMHO.

Whether or not it can change, it won't change much. A better measure

of fitness is RHR, not MHR. And the HR that is used to determine VO2

max is the maximum HR achieved during the exercise, not a person's

actual HR.

So knowing MHR is useful for determining at what level you should be

exercising, but not for determining your fitness level.

Diane

---

[Guest guest]

FWIW, I can never get to that HR anyway.

Even in a stress test, 4.6 mph, 14% slope.

I just find it amusing there are so many of these things that I can't use.

Most reliable is BP, IMO. My BP goes up instead of HR.

"low aerobic fitness" - that's a good one, .

At 3 mph, 10% slope, is HR = 61 "low" do you think?

Regards.

----- Original Message -----

From:

Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 1:36 PM

Subject: RE: [ ] Re: Maximum Heart Rate can change

Once again that sounds like trying to micromanage based on a difficult to measure and perhaps not well defined metric.I suspect the "rules" offered for exercising as a percentage of max heart rate are also estimates or approximations based on a diverse population. Even if you could measure your max hrt to a few decimal points the exercise levels you target based on that information may not enjoy much precision.I have outlived several HRT monitors but am not in a hurry to replace my last. I even own a fancy treadmill that can regulate speed based on hrt butI don't use that function since my personal pattern of HRT doesn't agree well with their control algorithms(at least the rates I tried). My personal HRT tends to over respond in early stage exercise, only settling down to a more normal ramp pattern after 15 minutes of continuous effort. This pattern serves me well for sports (like pick-up basketball) and doesn't seen to compromise my performance otherwise. I suspect I could mitigate this initial response by warming up a lot longer but I'm not motivated to add tens of minutes warming up to my workouts. I just start out slowly and save my kick for the end, where it should be anyhow.Relax, exercise should be fun. Running is a good timeto clear your head and enjoy nature (as much as one can enjoy running outdoors, in July, in MS). I don't find a little beeping micro-computer on my wrist very relaxing.Be well... all things in moderation. Physical stress Si,mental stress, no!JR PS: I just connected a very old unresolved data point. Manyyears ago while I was at the time participating in half-marathons I surprisingly failed an aerobic fitness assessment at my local health club. At the time I wrote it off to being tested on an exercise bike since I only trained as a runner, but in hindsight I suspect they read my aggressive early HRT response as a marker for low aerobic fitness. hmmmm

[Guest guest]

That sounds good to me.. but what do I know? I recall back when I had a day job sitting

in meetings with otherwise "successful" executives who were eating themselves to death.

In meetings where we were just sitting around on our bums for an hour, I could hear this

guy breathing from across the room. I'll bet his HRT was higher than 61 just sitting there.

I guess being fat provides the heart muscle plenty of exercise. Just no rest and recovery time.:-)

JR

-----Original Message-----From: [mailto: ]On Behalf Of jwwrightSent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 2:37 PM Subject: Re: [ ] Re: Maximum Heart Rate can change

FWIW, I can never get to that HR anyway.

Even in a stress test, 4.6 mph, 14% slope.

I just find it amusing there are so many of these things that I can't use.

Most reliable is BP, IMO. My BP goes up instead of HR.

"low aerobic fitness" - that's a good one, .

At 3 mph, 10% slope, is HR = 61 "low" do you think?

Regards.

----- Original Message -----

From:

Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 1:36 PM

Subject: RE: [ ] Re: Maximum Heart Rate can change

Once again that sounds like trying to micromanage based on a difficult to measure and perhaps not well defined metric.I suspect the "rules" offered for exercising as a percentage of max heart rate are also estimates or approximations based on a diverse population. Even if you could measure your max hrt to a few decimal points the exercise levels you target based on that information may not enjoy much precision.I have outlived several HRT monitors but am not in a hurry to replace my last. I even own a fancy treadmill that can regulate speed based on hrt butI don't use that function since my personal pattern of HRT doesn't agree well with their control algorithms(at least the rates I tried). My personal HRT tends to over respond in early stage exercise, only settling down to a more normal ramp pattern after 15 minutes of continuous effort. This pattern serves me well for sports (like pick-up basketball) and doesn't seen to compromise my performance otherwise. I suspect I could mitigate this initial response by warming up a lot longer but I'm not motivated to add tens of minutes warming up to my workouts. I just start out slowly and save my kick for the end, where it should be anyhow.Relax, exercise should be fun. Running is a good timeto clear your head and enjoy nature (as much as one can enjoy running outdoors, in July, in MS). I don't find a little beeping micro-computer on my wrist very relaxing.Be well... all things in moderation. Physical stress Si,mental stress, no!JR PS: I just connected a very old unresolved data point. Manyyears ago while I was at the time participating in half-marathons I surprisingly failed an aerobic fitness assessment at my local health club. At the time I wrote it off to being tested on an exercise bike since I only trained as a runner, but in hindsight I suspect they read my aggressive early HRT response as a marker for low aerobic fitness. hmmmm

[Guest guest]

>>I've been searching for articles about MHR and whether it can change, but

can't find scientific material.

This is another great example of something that has become accepted as truth,

and used in professional and public circles, and even in scientific circles but

has no scientific basis to it.

This is a great review article on the whole issue. If anyone wants a copy of

the PDF, emnail me offlist and I will send you one.

THE SURPRISING HISTORY OF THE " HRmax=220-age " EQUATION

ROBERT A. ROBERGS AND ROBERTO LANDWEHR

JEPonline

Journal of Exercise Physiologyonline

Official Journal of The American

Society of Exercise Physiologists (ASEP)

ISSN 1097-9751

An International Electronic Journal

Volume 5 Number 2 May 2002

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on this review of research and application of HRmax prediction, the

following recommendations can be

made;

1. Currently, there is no acceptable method to estimate HRmax.

2. If HRmax needs to be estimated, then population specific formulae should be

used. However, the most

accurate general equation is that of Inbar (17) (Table 3);

HRmax=205.8-0.685(age). Nevertheless, the error

(Sxy=6.4 b/min) is still unacceptably large.

3. An acceptable prediction error for HRmax for application to estimation of

VO2max is <±3 b/min. Thus, for

a person with a HRmax of 200 b/min, error equals ±1.5%. If this precision is not

possible, then there is no

justification for using methods of VO2max estimation that rely on HRmax

prediction formulae.

Prediction of Maximal Heart Rate

4. Additional research needs to be performed that develops multivariate

regression equations that improve the

accuracy of HRmax prediction for specific populations, and modes of exercise.

5. The use of HRmax is most prevalent in the fitness industry, and the people

who work in these facilities

mainly have a terminal undergraduate degree in exercise science or related

fields. These students/graduates

need to be better educated in statistics to recognize and understand the concept

of prediction error, and the

practical consequences of relying on an equation with a large standard error of

estimate (Sxy).

6. Textbooks in exercise physiology and exercise prescription should contain

content that is more critical of the

HRmax=220-age or similar formulae. Authors need to stress the mode-specificity

of HRmax, provide alternate,

research substantiated formula, and express all content of items 1-5, above.

Similarly, academic coverage of

HRmax needs to explain how this error detracts from using HRmax estimation in

many field tests of physical

fitness and in exercise prescription.

[Guest guest]

One more.....

The New York Times Health Page (April 24, 2001): " Maximum Heart Rate

Theory Is Challenged. " by Kolata. Believe it or not, the doctor

who created the formula shares my skepticism.

According to the article, The formula was devised in 1970 by Dr.

Haskell. Dr. Haskell and his mentor, Dr. Fox, were

trying to determine a safe level of exertion for heart disease patients.

They culled data from about 10 studies and came up with the formula more

or less off the cuff. Haskell, who is now a professor of medicine at

Stanford, says the subjects in the studies were never meant to be a

representative sample of the general population; most were under 55 and

some were smokers or had heart disease. Nevertheless, " The formula

quickly entered the medical literature, " The Times reports. " The

absolute numbers took on an air of received wisdom. "

" I've kind of laughed about it over the years, " Dr. Haskell told Kolata.

" [The formula] was never supposed to be an absolute guide to rule

people's training. "

Dr. Fritz Hagerman, an exercise physiologist at Ohio University, told

The Times that he 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. Hagerman has seen Olympic

rowers in their 20s with maximum heart rates of 220. And he has seen

others on the same team and with the same ability, with maximum rates of

just 160. The reason, Hagerman explained, is that some athletes push out

more blood with each heart beat, and others accomplish the same thing

with a faster heart beat.

[Guest guest]

Unless you control for speed and elevation (and to a

lesser extent ambient), I wouldn't expect this to tell

you much.

I fear I would be bored to death walking a mile if I

wasn't going somewhere :-) but back a few years ago

when I was logging ending hrt during 5 mile jogs on

my treadmill I ranged from 135 to 155 BPM depending

on final speed (6-7mph). Since then I have lost another

10 pounds or so who knows? I did log some peaks

that were improbable according to the standard equation

(I'd have to be -20 YO) and was probably an artifact

of intermittent or dry skin contact.

Thanx Jeff for the reference. There's a reason they call

these rules of thumb... they're about as accurate or

repeatable as people's thumbs... similar but not exactly

reference quality.

For general fitness I'd be more concerned about resting

HRT and BP. Targeted HRT specific intensity is indeed

useful for high performance athletics but CR isn't.

Another useful marker for exercise intensity is can you

maintain conversational speech... If you can't talk,

you may need to walk. Trying to micromanage effort level

to maximize fat metabolism over sugar is not that hard

and if you miss your body will consume fat later so what's

the big deal.....

JR

-----Original Message-----

From:

[mailto: ]On Behalf Of Rodney

Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 7:58 PM

Subject: [ ] Re: Maximum Heart Rate can change

Hi folks:

Related to this topic is the file in the DATABASE section here

titled 'Fitness Test - One Mile Walk - AHA'.

Only two people have entered data in this table. It would be quite

interesting if more people were to do so. For the two people who

have entered data so far the most remarkable thing may be the pulse

rate differences. One had an ending pulse of 110, the other 166.

The resons likely are that one was 23 years older than the other, and

the younger one walked harder. But it would certainly be interesting

to have more people put their data into that table. We might learn

some important things from it.

The instructions for how to determine your data can be found in the

posts that are listed in the first line of the table. So I encourage

more people to participate.

Rodney.

> > That sounds good to me.. but what do I know? I recall back when I

> had a day

> > job sitting

> > in meetings with otherwise " successful " executives who were eating

> > themselves to death.

> > In meetings where we were just sitting around on our bums for an

> hour, I

> > could hear this

> > guy breathing from across the room. I'll bet his HRT was higher

> than 61 just

> > sitting there.

> >

> > I guess being fat provides the heart muscle plenty of exercise.

> Just no rest

> > and recovery time.:-)

> >

> > JR

> > -----Original Message-----

> > From:

> > [mailto: ]On Behalf Of jwwright

> > Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 2:37 PM

> >

> > Subject: Re: [ ] Re: Maximum Heart Rate can change

> >

> >

> > FWIW, I can never get to that HR anyway.

> > Even in a stress test, 4.6 mph, 14% slope.

> > I just find it amusing there are so many of these things that I

> can't use.

> > Most reliable is BP, IMO. My BP goes up instead of HR.

> >

> > " low aerobic fitness " - that's a good one, .

> > At 3 mph, 10% slope, is HR = 61 " low " do you think?

> >

> > Regards.

> >

> > ----- Original Message -----

> > From:

> >

> > Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 1:36 PM

> > Subject: RE: [ ] Re: Maximum Heart Rate can

change

> >

> >

> > Once again that sounds like trying to micromanage based

> > on a difficult to measure and perhaps not well

> > defined metric.

> >

> > I suspect the " rules " offered for exercising as a

> > percentage of max heart rate are also estimates or

> > approximations based on a diverse population. Even

> > if you could measure your max hrt to a few decimal

> > points the exercise levels you target based on that

> > information may not enjoy much precision.

> >

> > I have outlived several HRT monitors but am not in

> > a hurry to replace my last. I even own a fancy

> > treadmill that can regulate speed based on hrt but

> > I don't use that function since my personal pattern

> > of HRT doesn't agree well with their control algorithms

> > (at least the rates I tried). My personal HRT tends

> > to over respond in early stage exercise, only settling

> > down to a more normal ramp pattern after 15 minutes of

> > continuous effort. This pattern serves me well for sports

> > (like pick-up basketball) and doesn't seen to compromise

> > my performance otherwise. I suspect I could mitigate this

> > initial response by warming up a lot longer but I'm not

> > motivated to add tens of minutes warming up to my workouts.

> > I just start out slowly and save my kick for the end,

> > where it should be anyhow.

> >

> > Relax, exercise should be fun. Running is a good time

> > to clear your head and enjoy nature (as much as one can

> > enjoy running outdoors, in July, in MS). I don't find

> > a little beeping micro-computer on my wrist very relaxing.

> >

> > Be well... all things in moderation. Physical stress Si,

> > mental stress, no!

> >

> > JR

> >

> > PS: I just connected a very old unresolved data point. Many

> > years ago while I was at the time participating in

> > half-marathons I surprisingly failed an aerobic fitness

> > assessment at my local health club. At the time I wrote it

> > off to being tested on an exercise bike since I only trained

> > as a runner, but in hindsight I suspect they read my

aggressive

> > early HRT response as a marker for low aerobic fitness. hmmmm

> >

> >

> >

> > ------------------------------------------------------------------

--

> --------

> > --

> > ! GROUPS LINKS

> >

> > a.. Visit your group " " on the web.

> >

> > b..