Re: was Full body scans - Heart-Rate Profile during Exercise as a Predictor of Sudden Death

[Guest guest]

FWIW, my resting HR is always < 60 bpm, usually on the order of 45. That is probably influenced by my calcium channel blocker, but it also a direct result of a low fat diet.

Second, my increase in HR is never enough to get over 130 bpm, in fact it's very hard to get to 130, in fact I measure it during a 3 mph hour walk and it's high is 81 in recent months. During stress test it took 15 min reaching 4.6 mph at 14% slope, to force it to 130 (65yo).

Third, my resting HR, 5 mins after exercise, is like 67 bpm, rested 10 mins - 65 bpm. So I'm out of all 3 categories defined in the article.

What I find interesting is the fact the devout exercisers are always telling me I MUST get to x rate when I exercise (based on my age, ie, 60 yo 130, now 70 yo 125 bpm).

I think 3 mph at 10% slope for 30 mins is sufficient. (I must be able to do that to keep up with my wife shopping for as much as 5 miles in 4 hours.)(ha)

I think maybe everyone who sets out to exercise better get the stress test first.

BTW, I measure my HR with a blood pressure monitor, not the finger to the neck or wrist stuff. A finger monitor works nice during exercise (not worth anything for BP, but pulse rate is accurate).

Regards.

[ ] Re: Full body scans> > > One of our good friends, a health "nut" dropped dead last week skiing from a cardiovascular event. This causes us to think that perhaps a full body scan might be prudent.> > Has anyone had one done? Any opinions?> > I realize that this is not directly CR related, but it is lifespan related!>

[Guest guest]

FWIW, my resting HR is always < 60 bpm, usually on the order of 45. That is probably influenced by my calcium channel blocker, but it also a direct result of a low fat diet.

Second, my increase in HR is never enough to get over 130 bpm, in fact it's very hard to get to 130, in fact I measure it during a 3 mph hour walk and it's high is 81 in recent months. During stress test it took 15 min reaching 4.6 mph at 14% slope, to force it to 130 (65yo).

Third, my resting HR, 5 mins after exercise, is like 67 bpm, rested 10 mins - 65 bpm. So I'm out of all 3 categories defined in the article.

What I find interesting is the fact the devout exercisers are always telling me I MUST get to x rate when I exercise (based on my age, ie, 60 yo 130, now 70 yo 125 bpm).

I think 3 mph at 10% slope for 30 mins is sufficient. (I must be able to do that to keep up with my wife shopping for as much as 5 miles in 4 hours.)(ha)

I think maybe everyone who sets out to exercise better get the stress test first.

BTW, I measure my HR with a blood pressure monitor, not the finger to the neck or wrist stuff. A finger monitor works nice during exercise (not worth anything for BP, but pulse rate is accurate).

Regards.

[ ] Re: Full body scans> > > One of our good friends, a health "nut" dropped dead last week skiing from a cardiovascular event. This causes us to think that perhaps a full body scan might be prudent.> > Has anyone had one done? Any opinions?> > I realize that this is not directly CR related, but it is lifespan related!>