Resting heart rate as a measure of mortality risk

[Soltydog]

At 47 years 58bpm is excellent, however according to the height/weight charts I'm still overweight (just) but my top half is getting too skinny for my liking now, so don't want to lose any more weight. Low RHR but overweight + & - = 0 I'm sure you can read whatever you want into stats, but I'm in the camp "when your numbers up, it's up" Hopefully I'll just die fitter & lighter than a couch spud

 

[fossyant]

Mine was always about 50 then kept up about 18 months ago, for what I now know as a hormone issue. It's back on track now I have replacement therapy.

Only down side is we need to watch my hemocrit, as too high, I could follow the drug abusing cyclists, heart attack in my sleep.

 

[Spoked Wheels]

I feel out of place with all the athletes here . I have actually being monitoring my blood pressure and pulse this week and my pulse fluctuates between 57 to 75. So I'll be making arrangements for my funeral .

The only thing I can say that my father was less fit than the worst I have ever been. He never practiced any sport other than chess. Didn't believe in diets and lived to 90.

 

[midliferider]

Well just measured mine, not expecting it to be absolutely fantastic but hoping for better than average and I got 60 bpm. Look up the table for a female my age and 60 just scrapes into athlete category.... I'm feeling pleased whilst knowing other measures would show I wasn't quite as healthy as that!

This was posted at 6.35 pm. Therefore this is not your resting heart rate.
(But it helps me to calculate your age.)

 

[midlife]

My heart rate is 60 + generally and that's just me, has been since our class did our physiology studies way back in the late 70's

Shaun

 

[tyred]

I am reliably informed that dead people have the lowest resting heart rates.

Which blackguard nailed me in this box and buried me? It's not funny.

 

[classic33]

51 at the moment, so I guess I'm mortal after all.

Heart required to measure heart rate though!

In the right circumstances, I've had it the low 40's. In hospital, drug induced, its been in the low to mid 30's

 

[mark c]

woop woop mines between 62-65bpm which means its between good and excellent for my age (50) :-)

 

[montage]

RHR actually means bugger all and cannot be compared to another person.

What is relevant is how your RHR varies for you, over time.
Taking your resting heart rate as a percentage of your max heart rate would be better than taking just your resting heart rate for comparison against others.

 

[Citius]

RHR is not an indicator of anything, any more than a engine's idling speed is indicative of it's redline RPM.

 

[Colin_P]

I'm sure someone has mentioned it but those archetypal willowly thin elite cyclist types with resting heart rates in the 40's (or any similar endurance athletes) are susceptible to a condition called athlete's heart.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athletic_heart_syndrome

Most articles you will read on the subject say it is harmless, which in most cases it is but it can leave you susceptible to Atrial Fibrillation (AF).

http://www.everydayhealth.com/colum...ation-why-vigorous-exercise-can-be-a-problem/


Everything in moderation and all that....

 

[Julia9054]

Been aware of this study for a while and find it slightly worrying. I have always had a high resting heart rate - below average - according to this table. When I was younger, I used to put it down to being unfit but as I have got fitter, it has not come down significantly although my recovery rate is good. I take medication for asthma (long acting bronchodilators as well as corticosteroids) which can elevate heart rate. I asked my doctor who said that the risks to my overall health of having badly controlled asthma and being unable to exercise at the level that I do would be worse than the risks of an elevated heart rate. (Or go away and stop fussing!)

 

[400bhp]

I'm sure someone has mentioned it but those archetypal willowly thin elite cyclist types with resting heart rates in the 40's (or any similar endurance athletes) are susceptible to a condition called athlete's heart.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athletic_heart_syndrome

Most articles you will read on the subject say it is harmless, which in most cases it is but it can leave you susceptible to Atrial Fibrillation (AF).

http://www.everydayhealth.com/colum...ation-why-vigorous-exercise-can-be-a-problem/


Everything in moderation and all that....

yeah, better to be unfit and fat.

 

[nickyboy]

RHR is not an indicator of anything, any more than a engine's idling speed is indicative of it's redline RPM.

Really? My RHR before I took up cycling 3 years ago was about 70. It's now 57. I'd like to think that this is at least somewhat indicative of improvement in cardio vascular efficiency

 

[Citius]

Really? My RHR before I took up cycling 3 years ago was about 70. It's now 57. I'd like to think that this is at least somewhat indicative of improvement in cardio vascular efficiency

Your RHR has changed. But a RHR of 57 is not, in itself, an indication of fitness. It is equally possible that someone fitter than you could have a higher RHR. Equally, someone less fit than you could have a lower RHR.