Heart

[T.M.H.N.E.T]

Consult a professional if in any doubt. Ignore the 220-age nonsense...

 

[Ajax Bay]

As regards heart rate the rule of thumb is 220 - your age gives your maximum HR putting you at 170.

This formula was made up when first produced and has been widely discredited (not that it had credit in the first place, as the originating doctor has been at pains to make clear).
Suggest the OP reads the Wikipedia page

 

[mjr]

The worst a health check can do is tell you you’re OK, the best it can do is highlight a problem in time to prevent more serious events.

Surely a health check telling you you're OK is the best outcome, not the worst?

 

[AndersonBiker]

I wouldn't bother with an HRM, just ride your bike. What benefit are you expecting from the HRM. Personally, I don't see the point unless you're training for something or a pro or maybe a cardiologist has told you to use one.

If concerned however, get checked by your GP

Hi, got hrm because I was a bit curious as to what heart rate was, cheers

 

[AndersonBiker]

Your boss is basing his statement on what exactly? As @mjr says, heart rates vary. And as @vickster says, don't bother with the HRM. Go and ride, enjoy the view, see the sun through the autumn leaves. What's the riding like in Kilmarnock?

Hi, Ridings ok around kilmarnock, fairly quiet rural roads, cheers

 

[AndersonBiker]

You said you’re three stone overweight and 51. Personally if I was you and concerned, which I presume you are by asking non qualified people on the web, I would see my GP and ask for a full health check. 40 pounds overweight is not healthy.

As regards heart rate the rule of thumb is 220 - your age gives your maximum HR putting you at 170.

I’m 63 which puts me at 160 maximum. My resting HR averages 47, last Sunday I rode 63 miles, 5300 feet of climbing with an average HR of 133 and a maximum of 180. On a flat ride at 15/16 mph I would typically be around 105/110.

I had a heart attack two years ago. I’ve spoken to my GP and practice nurse about hitting 180 or so when climbing hard and they say carry on providing it’s only when working hard.

So all of the above is me, irrelevant to you. Strava is an app which tells you little really other than comparing past activity. My advice to all my friends these days is if you’re worried or don’t feel right see a GP. Men are very bad at this. Cycling or not an admitted 40+ pounds overweight means, for me, you should see a doctor and look at lifestyle regardless of cycling.

Apologies if this reads as a lecture. I’m quite passionate about men’s health since having a heart attack completely out of the blue. The worst a health check can do is tell you you’re OK, the best it can do is highlight a problem in time to prevent more serious events.

Hi, thanks for reply .

 

[Fonze]

What's the correlation between heart rate and BP out of interest?

Heart rate and blood pressure are intimately related. Nerves and hormones constantly monitor and balance the heart rate and blood pressure. It is true that an isolated increase in blood pressure can drop the heart rate a little. But the reflexes that control blood pressure and heart rate are not simple. Sometimes, both heart rate and blood pressure can fall simultaneously, as happens with a typical fainting episode. Often, both heart rate and blood pressure rise together, such as when you exercise, get angry, or have an overactive thyroid

 

[Drago]

There's only one heart rate you really need to be concerned about:

0 BPM.

 

[PaulSB]

This formula was made up when first produced and has been widely discredited (not that it had credit in the first place, as the originating doctor has been at pains to make clear).
Suggest the OP reads the Wikipedia page

In my experience the NHS and British Heart Foundation would disagree with this view. I can’t argue the point but I’d be surprised if the NHS and BHF were misleading cardiac patients.

 

[si_c]

In my experience the NHS and British Heart Foundation would disagree with this view. I can’t argue the point but I’d be surprised if the NHS and BHF were misleading cardiac patients.

I doubt they will, which is why they won't be using that method, which is not useful for clinical purposes, in the first instance not being derived from original research, and in the second instance having a large standard error. These are the important things that clinicians will take into account when using a method for estimation.

Maximum heart rate does have a relationship to age, but that relationship is not defined, and whilst it may be linear, there is no adequate consensus on what that is, or what the baseline should be.

 

[Ajax Bay]

The HRmax = 220 − age formula it is widely thought to have been devised in 1970 by Dr. William Haskell and Dr. Samuel Fox.[23] It was not developed from original research, but resulted from observation based on data from approximately 11 references consisting of published research or unpublished scientific compilations.[24] [into patients with heart issues]. It gained widespread use through being used by Polar Electro in its heart rate monitors,[23] which Dr. Haskell has "laughed about",[23] as the formula "was never supposed to be an absolute guide to rule people's training."[23] While it is the most common (and easy to remember and calculate), this particular formula is not considered by reputable health and fitness professionals to be a good predictor of HRmax. Despite the widespread publication of this formula, research spanning two decades reveals its large inherent error, Sxy = 7–11 bpm. Consequently, the estimation calculated by HRmax = 220 − age has neither the accuracy nor the scientific merit for use in exercise physiology and related fields.[24]
See @si_c 's last sentence.
The BHF leaflet (carefully) says: "One way to work out your maximum heart rate is to take your age away from 220."
And the maths is easy unlike this one:
Tanaka, Monahan, & Seals (2001): HRmax = 208 − (0.7 × age) [21]

 

[Cronorider]

Your resting and max heart rates are not unusual. The fact that your average heart rate over the course of 20 miles is 170 would indicate that you are working quite hard for the duration of the ride. Compared to someone who has been doing a lot of riding and is very fit, 170 as an average would be high, unless of course they are out for a hard ride. You say you are trying to regain fitness. If your boss is a seasoned rider, then his heart rate will be lower than yours. Over time as you become fitter, your average heart rate will become lower.

 

[MikeG]

My heart rate was fairly high at my last medical , so I cut salt out of my diet completely.
Most foods have fair amount of salt in so I stopped adding salt to any foods and it helped in lowering bp.
Along with sensible diet and fitness it should reduce by itself , though as said some people do just have a high bp

Careful with this. We need sodium. My father in law was recently hospitalised for 3 days due to low sodium levels because he cut out all salt in his diet. Too much is bad, but so is too little.

 

[Fonze]

I 100% agree excessive sweating needs to be combated by rehydration electrolytes and intake of a sodium source.
My doctor advised me to read salt content in any packaged food and there is a certain amount you,need daily.
I'm more on about cooking with extra salt , salt on food such as chips etc

 

[PaulSB]

@Ajax Bay @si_c thanks for those interesting comments. Following a heart attack two years ago I had a lot of contact with the NHS and BHF. Both used the 220-age calculator on a regular basis. The NHS I recall at the rehab stage and the BHF in their literature.

Prior to posting yesterday I did check the BHF website and it is there with its careful “one” way qualifier.

Possibly both organisations are using this because it provides a safe and simple means to encourage people’s interest? Is it better for people to take note of their HR using a simple but less accurate method than to ignore HR because the calculation is too complex? Though saying this the example Ajax Bay gives is hardly taxing!!!