Max Heart Rate (Setting & Meaning)

[Nearholmer]

But what causes a step change at 60, it would seem as if a random age has been plucked. I suppose it could be based on population studies but that doesn't that help an individual make informed exercise decisions

Blowed if I know, but the chap was (a) highly medically qualified, and (b) a keen cyclist who was just about to turn sixty himself, and was in the process of searching for a new bike to move himself from “full on roadie and Audaxer” to “gravel and touring” so as to prevent himself hammering away at high HR for long periods, so he clearly believed in the advice he was giving.

Most health advice is population based, see the endless debates about statins for instance, and it’s often the case that without oodles of expensive investigations and tests it’s impossible to tailor the advice exactly to any given individual.

[axel_knutt]

I can maintain 160-165 for periods up to 2 hours, both cycling

Ditto, but that was exactly what the cardio chap told me was “not heart healthy once you get past sixty”, so I now only do it accidentally, and it’s noticeable that doing it leaves me a “a bit whacked” for the next 24hrs, whereas if I confine those higher numbers to shorter periods, and they don’t sum to a large amount of time overall, I’m ready to go again the next day.

But what causes a step change at 60

I used to see much the same at younger ages.
It's interesting that after I developed AF I noticed that an episode at 200+bpm for 10-20 hours left me with pretty similar fatigue and chest pain the day after to that which I had from a heavy cycle ride.

The caveat must always be - if in doubt get medical advice

After 10 trips to A&E in an ambulance the NHS still didn't accept that it was their advice that there was no need to stop cycling that kept putting me in there.

[re_cycler]

Assuming that heart function is healthy / normal isn't time in Zone 5 / HR Max going to be self limiting ?
I can see how multiple hours over 200 bpm would cause fatigue whatever it's cause.

Not trying to disagree with anyones comments just curious.

[axel_knutt]

I can see how multiple hours over 200 bpm would cause fatigue whatever it's cause.

My point was that the symptoms I had after 50-100 miles of cycling at 110-130bpm were similar to the ones I had after10-20 hours of AF at 200bpm.

[Nearholmer]

hours left me with pretty similar fatigue and chest pain the day after to that which I had from a heavy cycle ride

You get chest pain from a heavy bike ride?

That wasn’t what I meant by “a bit whacked”, I was talking about not being up for a load of exercise, a bit weary, not actual pain.

[Audax67]

But what causes a step change at 60

I used to see much the same at younger ages.

It used to be 40. Remember "Phyllosan fortifies the over-forties"? My wife can remember her mum telling her to go fetch her jumper because she was over 40 and her legs weren't so great any more. She (my wife) is 78 and has just left for a run/walk before the rain starts again.

Me, I'd love to be 60 again.

[Audax67]

hours left me with pretty similar fatigue and chest pain the day after to that which I had from a heavy cycle ride

You get chest pain from a heavy bike ride?

That wasn’t what I meant by “a bit whacked”, I was talking about not being up for a load of exercise, a bit weary, not actual pain.

Three possible sources in my inexpert experience: inflammation due to heart hammering away at inside of rib cage & so forth, strain of rib cage from heaving on bars, and heart problems. Doc told me once that if I could modify the pain by pressing on it or moving it, it wasn't cardiac.

[axel_knutt]

hours left me with pretty similar fatigue and chest pain the day after to that which I had from a heavy cycle ride

You get chest pain from a heavy bike ride?

That wasn’t what I meant by “a bit whacked”, I was talking about not being up for a load of exercise, a bit weary, not actual pain.

Three possible sources in my inexpert experience: inflammation due to heart hammering away at inside of rib cage & so forth, strain of rib cage from heaving on bars, and heart problems. Doc told me once that if I could modify the pain by pressing on it or moving it, it wasn't cardiac.

Before I had my ablation a nurse told me what sort of symptoms I could expect during recovery. As she described them I remember thinking to myself that she was describing the same symptoms I had during cycling that I'd been telling them about for years.

[axel_knutt]

inflammation due to heart hammering away at inside of rib cage

"Inflammatory mechanisms are implicated in various underlying conditions, producing the substrates necessary for AF.....the prognostic role of inflammatory markers in AF has been well established"

[Psamathe]

I wouldn't lose too much sleep over what your Garmin watch is telling you. The accuracy of the HRM function is pretty poor in my experience.

I had an earlier fitness model, Vivoactive 3, which I tried to use for fitness stats but when on my turbo trainer it was telling me my HR was 90-100 when I was knocking my pan in. I knew it was north of 150. I reverted to my Wahoo chest strap and, sure enough, it was reading 150+ for a 90-100 watch reading. The watch then just became a watch - it told the time but the battery life was so poor I couldn't use it for cycle route recording. I could, and did, use it to record 10km runs.

I gave up using it until I started to read reports that new technology meant watch HRM were more accurate. I wanted a watch I could use for my golf and fitness so I opted for a Fenix7. Battery life is much better, great for golf but the HRM is not much better. The chest strap comparison still shows a significant, but not as much, discrepancy. 90-100 on the watch equating to about 130 on the chest strap. The watch improves if I tighten the strap but I have to release it when my fingers start to turn blue.

Watch HRM are still Emporer's clothes territory but Garmin don't wan't you to know that.

Kept an eye on the HRM reading on today's ride to see what it did and my experience seems to match yours. My watch is one of their latest models, purchased a few months ago new (so very current, latest technology and one of the "Pro" versions - so best sensors).

I noticed that at times the HR reading being transmitted to the Edge computer was "--",. checked the watch and that read the same ie "--". Often looking at the watch would move the watch on my write and it would quickly start reading a real number again. Watching the historic last however long plot on the edge there were frequent gaps with no reading.

I have noticed in the past readings I cannot understand - they might be correct as I don't bother taking my pulse manually whilst riding but, high cadence on flat and fairly high HR eg 120. Few mins later slight incline really pushing it, legs burning struggling, breathing hard thinking it's time to back-off a bit and HR down in low 60s!. Thinking about this I concluded I don't have enough knowledge to explain it as in theory with a pump the flow is not necessarily only determined by the pumping rate but also by the volume each pump and (ignoring medical aspects) a pump could slow down and increase the volume per pump and be shifting higher flow rates through increased volume expelled each pump.

I wonder if my watch is suffering worse because I'm riding my tadpole recumbent with vertical steering position so watch face is vertical meaning watch is trying to fall away from wrist round to underside.

All that said, I doubt I'll buy a chest monitor as although they are not massively expensive I'm not diagnosing anything medical and it's just more faff to go for a ride and the results are not that important to me.

Ian

[Paulatic]

Those variations must be disappointing. I’ve used a monitor for 30 yrs using chest straps Sunto , Wahoo, and latterly a Polar H10. A few years ago I tried a wrist Scosche and was very disappointed with it. So much so I got my money back.
Around a year ago I got an Apple Watch 8 and was very sceptical about its HR capability. For a few weeks I’d also wear my Polar chest on rides and I’d compare the figures. Nothing more than one beat between them and agreed with each other for entire rides. The Polar chest strap now sits on a shelf. I should Ebay it.

[axel_knutt]

I have noticed in the past readings I cannot understand - they might be correct as I don't bother taking my pulse manually whilst riding but, high cadence on flat and fairly high HR eg 120. Few mins later slight incline really pushing it, legs burning struggling, breathing hard thinking it's time to back-off a bit and HR down in low 60s!. Thinking about this I concluded I don't have enough knowledge to explain it

From above:

Plethysmographic monitors are also very good at hiding arrhythmia. My AF doesn't show up at all on them, the paramedic's finger clip was showing 70bpm when my actual HR was 210.

The reason the finger clip was showing my heart rate as a third of the correct rate is that my heartbeat had a pattern in which every every third heartbeat was stronger, with weaker ones in between (SwwSwwSww etc), and simple plethysmography catches only the strong ones. My true HR from the ECG was 210, but the rate indicated on the finger clip oximeter was 70.

When we got to A&E on that day the triage nurse in the lobby also put an oximeter on my finger just like the paramedic had done before he wired up the ECG, and when she saw 70bpm she decided I was low priority. The paramedics tried to show her the ECGs but she wouldn't listen to them and made me wait until there was a cubicle free in Majors. I could see the paramedics weren't happy about it, but once they'd installed me in a cubicle and got their trolley back there wasn't a lot more they could do, so they left.

It was about another 10-15 minutes before a nurse came along and wired me up to the ECG, at which point she took one look at the 200+ bpm on the screen and just flew out of the door. Within seconds of that I was whisked up the corridor and put in Resus.

Trying to take your pulse manually also causes the same error, as another nurse discovered on a subsequent occasion.

[Psamathe]

Those variations must be disappointing....

Not disappointing as I didn't purchase the watch for yhe HRM, it just happened to have one and I'm messing around with it.

Interestingly it seems to read sensibly and continuously when used recording calisthenic type exercises (push-ups, etc.) and when walking. I din't know it's accuracy as I've never checked against anything when doing activity but what it says makes sense and looks reasonable.

Ian

[Psamathe]

I wouldn't lose too much sleep over what your Garmin watch is telling you. The accuracy of the HRM function is pretty poor in my experience.

I had an earlier fitness model, Vivoactive 3, which I tried to use for fitness stats but when on my turbo trainer it was telling me my HR was 90-100 when I was knocking my pan in. I knew it was north of 150. I reverted to my Wahoo chest strap and, sure enough, it was reading 150+ for a 90-100 watch reading. The watch then just became a watch - it told the time but the battery life was so poor I couldn't use it for cycle route recording. I could, and did, use it to record 10km runs.

I gave up using it until I started to read reports that new technology meant watch HRM were more accurate. I wanted a watch I could use for my golf and fitness so I opted for a Fenix7. Battery life is much better, great for golf but the HRM is not much better. The chest strap comparison still shows a significant, but not as much, discrepancy. 90-100 on the watch equating to about 130 on the chest strap. The watch improves if I tighten the strap but I have to release it when my fingers start to turn blue.

Watch HRM are still Emporer's clothes territory but Garmin don't wan't you to know that.

I found a Polar H9 (chest sensor) around £30 so thought I'd see what that did compared to the Garmin watch and ... big difference.

Major difference is that the Garmin after 10-15 miles would start giving unexpectedly low readings eg 60 bpm, so I'd really push it, be breathing hard, legs really feeling the extra effort, etc. and Garmin HR stayed at 60-70. Had me wondering if it's my lack of knowledge as the flow is not only a function of heart rate. But the HR shown by the Polar makes sense, no unexpectedly low rates, push hard and HR increases, coast and HR drops to something that makes sense to my non-medical understanding.

1. Garmin plot on Garmin Connect include one for Stamina. Unsure how they calculate it. Plot sort of made sense in that at start of ride it's high and through ride it declines. But for no apparent reason there were "glitches". eg

But using Polar H9 no such glitches, just a smooth straight decline.

2. Garmin watch was used with "broadcast HR" feeding into my Edge cycle computer so just using it as a HR sensor (ANT+ HR sensor). Polar H9 is also "feeding" straight into the same Edge also just as a HR sensor. But using the Polar Garmin Connect now seems to also be recording a respiration rate. No idea why.

3. No dropouts -watch would just give-up recording occasionally, several times per ride. Wasn't a communications issue as check the watch and it showed a HT of "--"

Watch has gone back to Garmin for refund, not because of the HR sensor shortcomings but daft automated activity sensing that you can't disable. The watch kept deciding I was having a nap. Generally once or twice a day, sometimes 3 times it would be recording a 20-40 minute nap. I don't take naps during the day. No way to delete these phantom naps. Loads of frustrated users having the same problems across many Garmin watch models. Apparently it's been an issue for ages. Simple option to add a setting "Nap Detection: Enable/Disable" - Garmin wont do that (and that would solve it for many users). Whats worse is you can't then delete these phantom naps. Their system is so convinced you've has a snooze it wont let you delete them!

Many watches tell the time so spending a lot lot more on a Garmin thing to get the activity functionality and for the cost you don't expect so many shortcomings. Hence return for refund.

Ian

[TrevA]

Wrist based heart rate monitors are not the best for cycling. When riding, you can cock your wrist and this sometimes causes the sensor to lose contact with the skin, which will result in inaccurate or sometimes no heart rate reading. I think this is what may be happening with your “- -“ readings. A chest strap heart rate monitor can still suffer from lack of reading, but not as much as a wrist based monitor.