Heart Rate

No, of course don't junk the Polar heart monitor! I don't have a good read on how the newer OwnZone features work, if you are using it. However the OwnZone Age is the 220 formula, so I suggest to simply not use that. You could either use one of the newer formulas, however it appears to me that you're best off establishing heart rate zones based on some sort of test. I'm not too familiar with those yet, but I'd find it interesting to do some research there. In the meantime, my plan is to continue using the HRM only to measure calorie burn, and just watch my HR. I have pretty much always gone as hard at workouts as I thought as I could manage for the expected length anyway.

Hmmm, what to do then? Junk the polar heart rate monitor? I will choose to continue to use it until a better estimate comes along.

www.nytimes.com/2001/04/24/health/ma
xi
mum-heart-rate-theory-is-challenged.R>html

faculty.css.edu/tboone2/asep/Robergs
2.
pdf ,and I quote "Consequently, the formula HRmax=220-age has no scientific merit for use in exercise physiology and related fields."

According to en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heart_r
ate ,"In 2007, researchers at the Oakland University analysed maximum heart rates of 132 individuals recorded yearly over 25 years, and produced a linear equation very similar to the Tanaka formula; HRmax = 206.9 − (0.67 × age)—and a nonlinear equation; HRmax = 191.5 − (0.007 × age2). The linear equation had a confidence interval of ±5-8 bpm and the nonlinear equation had a tighter range of ±2-5 bpm. [5]" Unfortunately, "Further, note that individuals of the same age, the same training, in the same sport, on the same team, can have actual Max HR 60 bpm apart (160 to 220)"

This makes me think about the caffeine before a workout thread. Hrm.

Thanks for the update!

I did, they are correct.
That first day I think I drank too much coffee to get my HR that high.
So far the laps done since that day have all had lower average HR. I have a feeling if I load up on another 4-5 cups of coffee before going out for my next walk on an 80 degree day with a 20lb. backpack I'll hit though high numbers again, but I don't want to push it.

Edited by: MRPLATSON at: 5/24/2010 (15:00)

MRPLATSON - any update here? Did you confirm or deny the HRM readings by taking your own pulse?

Are you perchance on thyroid meds? I have a friend who takes synthroid and her HR is really elevated, just in the way that you describe.

You might want to talk to someone in the medical profession about it, just to make sure it doesn't indicate something you need to know about...

I understand the limitations of using the 220-age formula, but it is good enough to set an initial target heart rate range. I then adjust what heart rate to maintain during exercise depending on how I feel. It is called RPE (something perceived exertion scale).

I also use NYU jog test to estimate my VO2max and track that quarterly.

Thanks for the additional information. Eyeballing your average heart rate for the walk seems to be in the appropriate range. What was your heart rate like post-exercise? Am interested how many minutes it takes to get down to your baseline (pre-exercise) heart rate.

One thing I've read is that max HR varies wildly among people, and that the 220-age formula is really not accurate. Also that it was sort of misapplied when it was co-opted for the Polar heart monitors - the researchers who created the formula were surprised and suggested it wasn't necessarily meant for that.

In my 20s I'd get my HR up to 170 or 180 (not entirely sure I remember, honestly). My calculated "recovery" heart rate (fully aerobic) was 140-145, my lactate threshold rate was 160-165 and my vO2 max rate was 180-185, iirc. Unfortunately, of course, calculated from the 220 formula. Still, they seemed accurate enough. 145 felt too easy to be doing any good (about like 130 now), 160-165 felt like the range I'd usually tend to work out in, and 180 was incredible, balls-out, make-my-heart-fly-out effort.

Today I have a difficult time getting it above about 163. When I walk I have an incredibly difficult time getting it above 130.

One thing is to make sure the electrodes are firmly against your skin. If the elastic band is not tight and the electrodes bounce off and back on when you swing your arms or whatever, it may register extra beats at those moments. It turns out there's a Polar page on unusual HR readings: http://www.polarusa.com/us-en/support/prod
uct_support?product=281&category=Tips&
documenttitle=%0AAbnormal+Heart+Rate+R
eadings+During+Exercise&document=/gip/
PEUS1kb-public.nsf/web_cat/85256F47004
8B0BCC225743A003F744E?openDocument

... and I found that page just as I was about to ask "is your transmitter coded?"

I took it easy today. My friend, with whom I normally walk, came back from injury so we took it easy; I also didn't bring my weighted backpack this time nor did I drink coffee.

HR in normal range - 131, max 145
I don't feel like I went for a walk, I'm barely even dehydrated.

If my friend doesn't go with me tomorrow I'll add some short sprints to the walk.

I guess I'll have to get some more details today when I come back from my walk. It'll be a light day so we'll see if my avg/max are lower.

Have you tried one of the cardio fitness tests? That sounds like one of two things: (1) you have poor cardiorespiratory fitness, or (2) you have a heart rhythm problem. How soon after stopping exercise does your heart rate go back to your normal rate? This is where your polar heart rate monitor might help.

Wow, My RHR is 48, even during the highest intensity levels of insanity cardio workouts I never got above 145, and those leave me laying on the floor gasping for life :). Have you physically checked your pulse at both levels to confirm?

I don't think I've ever seen 180 even in the most intense exercise. I'd fall over before my body would allow that. I can sustain 150 for awhile (jogging), but if I kick it up a notch and go to 160, I start breathing extremely heavy and eventually have to stop or slowdown dramatically. At 180, you should be about ready to fall over and somehow I imagine taking a brisk walk isn't going to make you fall over, so something doesn't smell right.

Can you feel your pulse while you're at 180? Are you sure it's 180? I can't imagine what damage you would've done to cause something like this. But I'm not a doctor, I don't even play one on TV, so this might be a question for your doc, especially once you've completely ruled out a faulty device.

Also see:
www.americanheart.org/presenter.jhtm
l?
identifier=4736

I bought a Polar FS2C with a chest strap and it's not wrong, that is my actual HR. (btw, 47 RHR is fantastic! avg for a person is 60-80)
There's no telling what kind of damage I've done to myself over the years - this is my attempt at fixing it all. I'm just concerned and curious, am I actually getting an anaerobic workout by just going for a fast walk? What are the consequences of that? If I run and my HR goes above 190 what are the risks?
The interesting thing is that you'd think after an hour of this I'd be tired, but I'm not really that bad, I could even go for another lap.

Uhhh .. ya, that seems way wrong. My RHR was around 47, a very brisk walk would put me around 100. A run is around 150-160. Hopefully your HRM is just way off, otherwise DON'T RUN! LOL!

Seriously though, what kind/brand of HRM is it? Does it have a chest strap?

I just got my Heart Rate Monitor and discovered a new problem...my resting heart rate is 74 but while taking a hard walk I'm pushing 180. This is putting me into anaerobic territory, but I'm just WALKING!
It's not like I just started walking yesterday, I've been doing it for over a month now and I was no stranger to walking before...

Any ideas?