Thanks to Dr Rohin Francis aka Medlife Crisis for the chat! If you’d like to watch us trade places (we literally swapped seats), there’s a video over on his channel where the doc interviews me about ageing biology. Check it out: ruclips.net/video/lkEHvSWeMzU/видео.html And hi to anyone from Team Crisis finding this channel for the first time! I hope you’ll smash that subscribe button because I know how much you love following health influencers like me and Rohin.
I had many centurions in my family on the side and they walk that’s all they did was walk because their jobs were farmers. They were also out nature state food that they grew and so the foods were Whole Foods so their mental health was better being out in nature, they also drink tea, plain regular tea with sugar, and some of them drink some coffee, some of them smoked in the early ages and gave it up and some didn’t drink anything at all
Question on the nice graphs for the steps, but is the grey area not the confidence interval, and if yes, that would mean not that we do no know what is going on, but the confidence in what would go on goes down. Also, the widening intervalls would mean, less people out of the participants fall into this area, with many people managing 100 steps, a bit less 5000, and decent chunk less 25k.
@@sciencefliestothemoon2305 Exactly the right interpretation! We’re not sure what happens, best guess is not much, and the reason is that only a handful of people do 25k steps every day.
I am 74 with a resting heartrate of 55 doing about 600 mins cycling / week split equally between zone 2 and above. Favourite Garmin stat is fitness age at 61.5!
This video was recommended to me by RUclips. I thought it was a joke to start with; two blokes on garden chairs with half an upside down skeleton and one ridiculous moustache. However, very interesting. Learnt a lot, thanks.
Haha, the topsy-turvy world of RUclips, where two blokes on garden chairs are legit and yet those inhabiting flashy podcast studios are often, well… Thanks for clicking! :)
My Apple Watch 4 consistently estimates my VO2max to be below average, at around 35, which is weird since I exercise quite a lot. Then I did a proper VO2max test and my result was above 50. So yes, those wearables' VO2max results can be quite off the mark.
@@cyc00000 No it is not, 50 is a good VO2max. According to wiki "The average untrained healthy male has a V̇O2 max of approximately 35-40 mL/(kg·min).[11][12] The average untrained healthy female has a V̇O2 max of approximately 27-31 mL/(kg·min)." Don't confuse the VO2@max numbers for genetic elite from Olympic Games with what 99% of population is actualy capable of.
@@cyc00000 Not so for an average person, particularly above age 45. By all charts, 50 is considered fit for men at almost any age. For an athlete, yes it's low.
At the age of 51 my resting heart rate is in the 50s. I used to see high 40s about 3 years back but that not the case now. I do cardio at least 3 days a week every single week since mid February 2015. Which was the year my father passed away from diabetes. Seeing all he went through his final year from surgeries, amputations, dementia .. was what got me started and kept me going.
@@DrAndrewSteele Thanks. It has been a long journey between cardio, diet changes & work to improve sleep. For anyone who has had a similar experience to what my father went through (or other health condition that scared you) my advice is the changes you make to improve your health will not happen over a short period of time. If you try to make too many changes at once you make it too difficult to be able to accomplish your goals.
@@drescherjm I think this is great advice, and applies beyond the realm of improving health too-doing too much at once and therefore failing at all of it is seriously demotivating. Having the resolve to make lots of small changes over a long time can have its challenges too because it can feel slow, but probably has far better results. Great to have some motivational reading in the RUclips comments for a change. :)
My resting heart rate is 49 average over a year and my sleeping average is 43 and dips to 36 when sleeping. I cycle about 5 hours a week on average mostly high intensity. But when i used to vape my resting heart rate was 63 and i still did the same amount of exercise then. If you use nicotine daily and care for your health, you know what to do
He didn't cover what actually begins to happen down in the under-40 club. The lowered risk starts going away rather quickly, sometimes requiring monitoring / intervention in highly-conditioned athletes. The body really doesn't like that state of affairs, either. The old conventional wisdom about "balance in everything" remains excellent advice, and maybe even more so in a world highly influenced by the nut-job voices in social media.
The Dr. makes a good point regarding wearable device data. It’s better to view it as relative rather than absolute measures of fitness. So, if your watch tells you your fitness is improving over the weeks that’s probably good enough, but don’t think the actual number it’s giving you is absolutely right.
I remember hearing that while the VO2 max estimate on watches wasn't necessarily accurate, as long as it was precise (ie same person same conditions gets same result) it was still a worthwhile metric to see how it changed for you over time. so you don't care about the absolute number, but your trend
There is value in a relative number. As long as better is better and worse is worse. And like mentioned in the video, seeing progress has a positive psychological effect.
I'm 63 and spend about 11 hours a week at the gym doing a variety of aerobic, core, and strength classes. Plus I take frequent brisk walks of anywhere between 2-5 miles. I don't have a wearable and don't have a particular desire for one. All I know is I feel effin' fantastic. I have no idea what people my age mean when they say they feel old. I did just take my resting pulse rate and it was 59 bpm. It would be cool to know my VO2max, though.
As a young adult, above average fitness, more accidental than training, I was textbook 72bpm resting. Once I started winter climbing I really noticed things changing. Was 47/48-ish bpm sometimes in my late 30s and 40s. Now same age as rock n roll and had a rather inactive year for training and hill days but 49-53 bpm resting. Going straight out now for 6000 steps up and down that hill before bed. 😎
as a 25 year old smoker and non exerciser my resting heart rate was high 70s in June 2022, as of December 2022 my resting heart rate is high 50s. It’s strange because in that time period i haven’t changed a single thing, still smoking and not exercising, eating the same meals and weighing the same
Almost all the times my watch has thought I'm exercising hard enough to report a VO2 max have been when I've been carrying heavy grocery bags home from the supermarket, making me seem a lot less fit than I am. Or at least, that's my story and I'm sticking to it!
FYI active zone minutes don't work so well if you have anxiety. I easily get over 100 every day I'm in office or anywhere where i socialize a lot. Talking to people raises my heart rate quite a bit 😅😬
220 - age shoud be taken with more than a grain of salt (it sucks) and zone 5 is absolutely not an all-out sprint. If you did a very short exercise all-out, your heart rate doesn’t reach high, and if you did a long endurance event, you don’t have the energy to get close to max HR for the long time. (sweet spot is ~20 min.) At high heart rates, you should ideally be measuring with the much more accurate chest-based or arm-based heart rate monitors. I really liked the message from the video about the importance of heart health! We need more people to do exercise, because it’s sad that walking is considered exercise, and zone 2 is considered vigorous, though it is something you should be able to hold all day. (Realistically, when people do more than walking, they go too hard anyway, way past z2.)
As a reasonably fit athlete (in my 40s far from elite) I do find this fascinating. I’ve always had a very low resting hr since I started training in my teens at less than 40 and a max of 187 with a functional threshold of 170. Nice to know I’m protected against a lot
@@patrickkalin4437 it’s from cycling, my functional threshold power is around 270 watts, I can hold that along with a heart rate of 170bpm for an hour.
Most doctors do not consider that athletes can have a resting heart rate even lower than 30 per minute. My heart rate now is 36, which is not even included in the graph shown at the beginning of the video. This is a problem when we are to be diagnosed for desies. A resting hart rate of 80 indicates more than twice our baseline but we may be regarded as healthy and missing the diagnosis of potentially dangerous infections!
@@marty197666 I don't know my VO2max & functional threshold; I haven't measured it. But since I returned to mountainbiking, my resting heart rate is somewhere between 60 bmp & below.
Zone 2 training isn't about heart rate, it is about lactate (below LT1, first lactate threshold). Going as hard as possible, while being able to hold a conversation, is the best way to determine it. Which is nice because anyone can do it, even without a heart rate monitor. Other nice thing about zone 2 is that it leads to improvements over time. Most people would start at 70% of their maximum HR, and then, after a few years, move up to 80-85% of maximum heart rate. Which is huge. Unfortunately, lots of people still train in zone 2 by heart rate, which means they will remain forever there without noticing any metabolic adaptations.
Garmin had me at a VO2max of 57 for running, which I was pretty proud of as a 37 yo. Then I did a proper test on a treadmill, worried it that the results would be well below, but turned out it was almost 70! In that moment I realised something. I've always been a homebody nightowl guy who liked to party a bit much, now I'm up at dawn on the weekend training for a marathon PB, and I don't intend to ever stop
@@briandriscoll1480 that's true, and I think I have full gassing it on my bike after every stop light to thank for a lot of it. Unbeknownst to me I was probably doing many vo2max type efforts every day for a decade before I started looking closer at these things
I'm glad the internet exists so people like you and Dr Rohin Francis can explain things the general public ought to understand but generally don't, even when their doctors try to explain it to them (in less than 60 seconds more often than not due to time constraints). Of course the other side of the card is the horrendous spread of misinformation which sucks.
Completely disregarded the impact of maximum moustache volume on health outcomes 😋 There must have been a reason all the old-school strongmen had exquisite moustaches😁
I would say use the watch a week every month, learn from it, apply what you've learned, do the same the next month until you've got good habits going, then just use it every few months for maintenance. Don't use it all the time and let it become neurotic. Remember one part of why lower heart rate is associated with health is that it's associated with less stress, so don't cancel out a percentage of your gains by ruminating over numbers every day I also want to say that you can get these for about 15 euro, they are accessible for people who can't access expensive health fads
I’m 1.92m tall, and there is no way I can complete 10000 steps in only an hour. My mom and I walk together a lot, for a time we used the same Fitbit model. She consistently gained 50% or more more steps than me. I’m curious if that consideration shows up in any of these studies.
That’s a really good question! I’ve never seen a study that takes that into account (though step counting is definitely not my expertise!) and I suspect because most people are about the same height (‘most’ and ‘about’ are doing a lot of work there…) it probably comes out in the wash…unless you’re super-tall or -short!. Probably a good reason to go with my favourite stat, Active Zone Minutes. :)
I was told in a chiropractic new patient training to get 30 minutes/2 miles of deliberate walking time daily. I have followed that pretty deliberately for 20+years doing 2-4 miles most days. My resting HR remains about 60bpm. (I try to walk 2.5 miles a day minimum at 17.5 minutes per mile).
7:47 10K total steps aligns with a 60% risk reduction. 7:52 10K purposeful step only gives a 48% risk reduction, yet presumably their total steps were higher than 10K? This doesn’t make sense, there must be a missing factor somewhere.
I appreciate your attention to data and details, and I look forward to the rest of this wearables series. A fantastic resource for this is Andy Galpin. He gave great info during a recent guest episode of the Huberman Lab Podcast on how to assess your fitness: protocols, minimal and preferable numbers, etc.
I am now 65. Fitbit has consistently been showing my VO2 Max between 45 and 51 for many years. I was quite flattered by this :) However even if it is 20% off target my current 48 would be 38.4 which is still in the ' very good ' category. I think my Fitbit gives accurate heart rated from resting to about 120BPM and then it is all over the place. Good to see videos like this which bring some perspective and hopefully some detachment from wearable devices.
Regarding how long it takes to walk 10,000 steps, a brisk, purposeful walk for a normal person might be up to 120 steps per minute. An exceptionally vigorous, highly trained walker may be able to achieve 140 to 145 steps per minute. So this is ~84 minutes for a normal person walking fast to as little as 69 minutes for an exceptional athlete walking very hard. If you are running, then getting just over 10k steps an hour is normal.
Interesting angle to using fitness devices👍 We need more studies, but no doubt sleep quality is extremely important for our health! If you are serious about pulse training, you always wear a pulse strap. It gets the max pulse right and definitely gives better precision on the VO2Max estimate.
One question that hunts me from time to time is : if people that have very bad health can't even walk it , unless they deal first with their internal biology through nutrition ,supplementation and medication first . Would this mean that those who walk to get these benefits are already quite healthy and with no major nutritional deficiencies , no bad metabolism , well balenced hormones and very low toxicity levels .
I use to have a resting HR of 80 . . . turns out I had renal cell carcinoma. Now it's 60-65. Lower heart rate does not lower your risk of cancer . . . some cancers literally raise your HR. It's not a RISK but a SYMPTOM.
I’ve always had a low rhr. When I am on a calorie deficit and running it tanks to 50. Overeating instantly raises it. I actually use it a way to check whether I am in a deficit. I think in order to maintain a low RHR you have to be doing all the healthy things anyway. So it’s just a simple tracking thing.
Heads up about the intensity minutes on your tracker. How many you get awarded is dependent on your max HR set on the watch. Check this is closest to what you see on a high intensity runs etc and do not rely on the age calculation which is very inaccurate, especially for the older age groups. Too low and you will get minutes for just washing the dishes, too high and a walk will not show up. Love my Garmin. It got me doing those steps which then progressed to running. My VO2Max climbed five points over four years. Is in the top 10% for my age group. Data is power. Sometimes the glitches annoy but the forums help to understand and fix issues.
Yes, I almost mentioned this but then decided to keep things simple because most devices do a measurement while you’re active! The H10 (and I think a few other devices) seem to use some combination of resting heart rate and heart rate variability, but from the papers I saw they tend to be (even) less accurate… I’ve been playing around with the one on my H10 and I’ve not quite worked out why but my measurements vary wildly!
@@DrAndrewSteele I don’t know how accurate it is, but I find it tends to match what Garmin predicts. The problem with most of the VO2 estimates is that they need the person to input their training volume on a 1-10 scale. Do you know if VO2 estimates using a power meter on a bike/trainer are more accurate? Garmin will give a separate VO2 estimate for running and cycling and they often don’t match for me.
@@Marty72 I wonder if this might be the issue…I reduced my training volume in the Polar app (after a few busy months) and my VO2 max dropped by 15! LOL. I’ve not seen any data for bikes/trainers specifically, but my guess is they’d suffer from most of the same problems of indirect measurement-they might be a bit better because they know exactly how hard you’re working because they set the resistance etc, but they still don’t know any specifics of your physiology…
We have numbers on fitness devices that show it does EFF ALL for motivating people to exercise. It's nothing but a entertainment device, now there is a small subgroup of neurodivergent, that seems to require EXTERNAL motivation and that a fitness device might be able to do that, but they are not designed for those users, so it may work in somewhat unhealthy ways.
Calculating an accurate VO2 Max using running data is inherently more difficult for the reasons you mentioned, but devices like the Garmin are getting better at it (as you note) as GPS accuracy and OHR sensors improve, but there have also improved with the introduction of algorithms to calculate running power. It's my understanding that VO2 Max estimates using cycling data are much more reliable because it requires a power meter. The device is not guessing based on pace, which can be influenced by a massive number of variables any more. It's using a metric that provides a much tighter number. Obviously, the calculation can only be as good as the data provided, a dual-sided (or total power) PM is going to have higher confidence than a one-sided. All that said, the value in almost all of the data that is captured, calculated, or estimated is in looking at the trends more than the actual number.
2:50 My theory, from a non-medical person, is that the lower the heart rate the better the health. When I got COVID I noticed it because I went from my normal 50-55 bpm to 80 bpm resting (that was basically my only symptom), so when something is going wrong in the body and it needs to spend more energy for it, the heart rate increases. Also, it could be due to the metabolism. The lower the metabolism, the lower the heart rate, that I think it's my case since it started to go down when I started intermittent fasting (I started with 16/8 and now I'm more like 20/4, but if I have to cheat one or two days, I cheat 😂). When the metabolism lowers, the cells don't multiply as fast so the probability of cancer lowers and maybe the autophagy mechanism is triggered as well, so cancerous cells are killed sooner. Again, this is a theory from someone just curious about medicine and I could be wrong in many of the things I've said!
Great video very interesting, I'd also say that the amount of time sleeping is another very important metric that the watches can measure. Like all the data wearables measure it's not always the most precise. I question its accuracy in measure the different zones of sleep and quantifying the quality with a sleep score but people often neglect sleep when its really important for maintaining and improving health and fitness.
I'm a 57yr old woman who likes to cycle. My heart rate rests in the low 40s when I'm just sitting there (on the sofa, not my bike!) (I feel great but nevertheless it freaks me out) and my max hr cycle up a really steep hill is 188bpm. I don't drink wine or eat late any more because it makes me wake in the night with a 130bpm hr. Very very scary.
@@alanmalarkey HRV is a non specific marker of stress. It correlates inversely with the latter. A low HRV, assuming it has dropped from your baseline, means something is not quite right with your health and your body is struggling to fix this something. The issue could be lack of sleep, psychological stress, impending illness (like a flu starting up) or a chronic health problem or something else. The practical aspect is this. If the HRV has dropped, look for a cause but also be aware that it’s a sign to take it easy that day. This might mean having a light workout rather than a heavy one, more sleep etc..
The problem with resting hr is that some people have naturally lower rhr therefor it doesnt mean they are fit. So it can be very misleading. Also the best for everyone to use a chest hr for running and get your zones dialled in. If you can run in zone2 faster in the future that means you are improving.
People want to obsess over these things but dividing things up by quartiles or quintiles, of any of these metrics, is about the highest level of exactitude you can really expect or put some stock in. I've read that resting heart rate can be genetically low or high but a change toward lower can be an indicator of fitness. Drastic changes should be run by a doctor though as it can go down or up for non-fitness related reasons. Comparisons between individuals may not work even though people want to do that so bad! It may be an internally consistent metric though. So many want it to be an externally consistent metric. It isn't at this level of testing/measuring. This is a lot like bodyfat testing. You might actually have a 3% drop but you might not really know your actual bodyfat percentage with the same accuracy as your estimation of drop. It's still useful to compare yourself to yourself but less good to compare yourself to others which is what so many want. I'm suggesting that might be something to deemphasize and for more than one reason.
Was looking at the numbers from my apple watch while watching this video, and it's interesting to correlate resting heart rate with what I was doing at the time
I usually wear a chest strap when it comes to measuring heart rate when exercising. Like Rohan, I don't pay attention to it during exercise (I either use feel for low intensity cardio, or pace/power targets for higher intensity intervals, or for sprints I just max out), but I do like collecting data almost pathologically. I'm not sure how accurate chest straps are however. I assume they are much more accurate than the optical sensors on watches, since they are detecting the electrical signals that cause the heart to beat, but I don't know if they are perfect. As a side note, the 220-age has always been funny to me. I am 38, and hit a 206 heart rate in a recent interval running session (measured with a chest strap). I like to imagine I have the heart of a 14 year old, but in reality I suspect I have a smaller than average heart compared to my size (1.99m/90kg) and it has simply adapted to beat faster to supply the same flow rate than a larger heart would manage with a lower heart rate. I've heart stories of professional rowers of the same age with max heart rates (and lactate threshold heart rates) varying by 40+ BPM too. It just seems highly personalised. Anyway, I came here from Medlife Crisis, and have smashed that like subscribe button!
Welcome, thank for the sub! From what I’ve read, chest straps are essentially as accurate as medical-grade devices they’ve been tested against so pretty trustworthy. You might enjoy the previous video in this series, ‘Can you trust your smartwatch?’ :)
220 minus age is totally bogus. In my thirties I could barely attain 160. I was a cycling time triallist in my younger days with quite a few wins. It’s about volume delivered, not RPM.
Devices are all over the place as far as max HR. At 67, I can easily crank out 180 without max effort, on my Garmin Epix. On my Garmin Fenix 6 a couple years ago, I hit 190 while cycling. Are those numbers real? Well, 25 years ago in a lab VO2max test, my HR maxxed out at 186, at which point further intense effort became impossible, and I felt like crap afterward. I find it hard to believe I'm still there, 25 years later.
Good video. My problem is the beta blocker (forcing a lower heart rate, after acute heart failure). So me getting to a higher zone on my Garmin isn't achievable. Resting is usually about 50 and a "fast" walk (which I can talk on the phone, for me) is 120 bpm. I have gotten up to 138 on swinging a bush ax and can maintain for an hour tree cutting/ moving wood as an exercise. HBP is my culprit with pill control and I eat healthier with extra salads per day. Vivosmart 4 was a gift from a friend and used since Christmas 2022. Thanks for presenting!
Yes step counters are truly crap at the 'incidental' steps as you said. I bought a cheap-ish Mi-band just to see what the fuss was about. Like you I was pleasantly surprised how accurate it was when walking around outside. But after a few days I realised how shit they were, because it counted 50 steps from me standing at my kitchen counter making a coffee, and another 400 steps just while I showered (probably from washing my hair I guess?) This isn't a small over-count. Imagine you don't go out and walk much that day, but it's registering thousands of steps while you're making the bed, hanging washing or chopping vegetables. It's show more false positives than actual real steps. Gah, somewhat useless things.
Max Heart Rate does not mean you are completely exhausted. It is something you cannot maintain for long but certainly you can endure multiple efforts at Max HR and continue to exercise for several hours. I know because I have done it. Of course as cyclists like to say you only have so many matches to burn so these repeated efforts will create fatigue but if you are well conditioned they do not leave you completely exhausted!
54 years old , Resting heart rate mine 49 ,correlated VO2 , good to know this , my cac score is 600 , even I think I have a strong heart rate. I should lower my statin mg
One explanation why a lower heart rate = lower risk of cancer is because people who exercise more are also more likely to eat healthy and take care of themselves
One indicator that Fitbit has, within the sleep analysis, is the percentage of time your HR is below resting HR. I find that correlates quite well with how restful I feel about the night of sleep. Like other indicators, it's not so much about the actual number, but a trend over time. Eg , if I realized that this percentage has fallen to low numbers in the past week or 10 nights, I'll try a few things to make myself rest a bit better.
Have you looked at "running power" and the variants of that? Similar role to heart rate, but it's more responsive (in nominal cases), giving you a sense of when you're loading yourself before your heartrate responds to the load. I won't bias by mentioning any brands. I will call out there are several meanings to the term since you can measure power in different places and ways. Related to what you're looking at and possibly an interesting avenue to look at in parallel with it.
For VO2 max, you can do a Cooper test, run 12 min as fast as you can on flat surface (ideally a 400 m running track). The distance covered is correlated to the VO2 max. One of the criticism is that 12 min is very long and it is difficult to sustain max effort for that duration, so it could possibly under-estimate the real value that would be measured in lab conditions.
@@DrAndrewSteele Cooper KH. A means of assessing maximal oxygen intake. Correlation between field and treadmill testing. JAMA. 1968 Jan 15;203(3):201-4. PMID: 5694044.
@@DrAndrewSteele Penry JT, Wilcox AR, Yun J. Validity and reliability analysis of Cooper's 12-minute run and the multistage shuttle run in healthy adults. J Strength Cond Res. 2011 Mar;25(3):597-605. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181cc2423. PMID: 20647946. According to this, it is a fairly reliable estimate of VO2 max but only in relatively fit subjects, so not applicable to untrained subject (I suppose running flat out for 12 min needs a relative amount of training to begin with) and doesn't work well on the other end of the spectrum (i.e. professional athletes)
@@RaphaelChaleil Really interesting! And certainly sounds like it makes sense. For example, I’m not sure I’ve ever run as hard as I could for 12 minutes (30 seconds, yes, 5-10k I have a reasonable idea, but 12 minutes?!) so I’d guess I’d improve a bit with practice, knowing how to pace myself. And presumably there’s a discontinuity between running and walking… Interesting that a bleep test doesn’t look bad either! Alas I’m slightly outside the 18-35 range where it’s considered accurate now haha
@@DrAndrewSteele I think this is one of the big flaws of this method, it is almost impossible to be at max for 12 minutes, and a great part of the progress is probably due to better pacing with practice rather than actual physiological improvement (certainly in my case). But I think the cooper formula (VOzmax = (d-504.9)/44.73 with d being the distance in 12 min to the closest 100 m), is based on correlation and implicitly takes that into account. It means that with a lot of practise, the results might get more accurate as there must be a point when improving the pacing is reaching a plateau and the measure becomes then a true measure of VO2 max.
In fairness, have to say, fitness devices on your wrist are just guides in my view. I wear Fitbit Sense, it is not perfect in all categories, specially the heard rate on the long run is questionable, but it gives me an overview of my progress, and it is one of the accurate sleep tracker.
I don't think I've ever gotten an accurate measure of resting heart rate because I ALWAYS get nervous/performance anxiety when it's time to take it, even if just a little and even if I'm taking it myself in a calm environment. So I feel my pulse quicken. I've been resisting getting any kind of wearable but the fact that it's always on and I can't always be nervous about the measurement might mean I get an actually accurate measure.
I get terrible white-coat hypertension and tachycardia (ie my blood pressure and pulse measurements in the doctor’s office are much worse than at home!) so I feel you!!
@@DrAndrewSteele Same here with the white coat syndrome! One thing I've found that helps it be a little more accurate at the doctor's office is to hold/rest your wrist across your chest just at heart level (it's how it's supposed to be taken especially with wrist monitors). Also if you can get there a little early and relax after driving. And you're dead on Ridley with wearing it all the time you can't always be nervous, IMO it's worth knowing and tracking
@@ThePetalesharo Good tips! Alas, to add to the white coat hypertension, once a nurse took my blood pressure after forcing me to run down a corridor carrying my bike so relaxation wasn’t an option!!
The steps taken around the house are not that important? Please explain why? During the winter 8 do not spend so much time outside and easily clock my 10,000 steps around the house, as I have a spacious house. Is it really not good enough? And why? What am I doing wrong?
It’s not that the fact of being inside matters! As we discuss in the video, the paper looked at ‘purposeful steps’ which I think they defined at > 40 steps/minute, ie walking somewhere rather than pottering about. If you’re striding from one end of the big house to the other these might well be ‘purposeful’ as defined in the research, so don’t panic! And, as I hope we communicated in the video, steps are a good guideline but probably not the best value to optimise for your health. :)
What does risk/probability of death mean? I was wondering because 50% less likely to die this week and 50% less likely to ever die is a big difference. Looked it up and it’s the likelihood that someone will die within the next year. This is typically stratified by age or gender, etc.
There are some studies in males showing that a lot of the age associated loss of VO2 Max is not wholly inevitable and can be mitagated by serious exercise. I'm a little uncomfortable about how you discussed that part but I enjoyed the video.
Thanks a really useful to know what a cardiologist thinks is worth paying attention to on these devices, I have a Garmin Epix Pro it tells when my sleep is bad. I don't need a watch to tell me I have bad sleep 😀 Also nice to see Rohin sporting the Black Adder General Melchett moustache!
7:11 Hang on. Increasing your daily steps to 10000 gives you an adjusted hazard ratio of -0.59 (great!). Yet 10000 *_purposeful_* steps drops that only down to -0.47 (not quite so great...). So, either those graphs are telling us that 'daily steps' is quite a bit better than 'purposeful steps' - or those graphs have been done wrong. Which one is it? It's odd for you to get excited about something that's apparently contradicting the point you're making....
I did think about going into that but thought it would overcomplicate things… The issue is probably down to which model they use for each graph (ie whether they consider total steps, or split them up, which will change the stats a bit), plus the practical point that it’s very hard to eg get 10,000 incidental steps unless you have a very inconveniently laid-out house! More practical for most people is just to purposely integrate walking into their day. :)
Bicycles, ebikes, electric cargo bicycles, robo taxis and escooters are great options for last mile, short distance travel. Reduced transportation costs and fossil fuels free transportation. Cities need to do more to encourage people to ride bicycles by providing SAFE, PROTECTED BIKE LANES and trails. Every adult and child should own a bicycle and ride it regularly. Bicycles are healthy exercise and fossil fuels free transportation. Electric bicycles are bringing many older adults back to cycling. Ride to work, ride to school, ride for health or ride for fun. Children should be able to ride a bicycle to school without having to dodge cars and trucks. Separated and protected bike lanes are required. It will also make the roads safer for automobile drivers. Transportation planners and elected officials need to encourage people to walk, bike and take public transportation. Healthy exercise and fossil fuels free transportation. In the future cities will be redesigned for people not cars. Crazy big parking lots will be transformed with solar canopies generating free energy from the sun.
I’m left handed and received an Apple Watch for Christmas. It was showing that I was doing a lot of incidental steps. I wondered if it was picking up the movements I make with my left hand so I swapped it to my right and bingo - the incidental step count came down.
great video! I hated the part about resting heartrate, but that moustache made up for it by a factor of 100. I'd pretty much assumed that the masculinity requirements to manifest such a beast were lost to history.
Apple watch is the best by far from multiple tests, comparing many watches. Best sensors by far also for sleep tracking. Just expensive and short battery, unless you can afford the ultra edition.
Agree to an extent…the heart rate measurements are very accurate during exercise but very infrequent during all-day tracking, and I’m loath to not collect a bit more data! They are good watches though, and none I’ve tried/looked into seem to be perfect… :)
Well the answer to this title is obvious based on the guest Rohin...the size of your 'stache is what matters most. I suspect having a pelvis for a head as demonstrated by the background model might factor in as well.
Thanks to Dr Rohin Francis aka Medlife Crisis for the chat! If you’d like to watch us trade places (we literally swapped seats), there’s a video over on his channel where the doc interviews me about ageing biology. Check it out: ruclips.net/video/lkEHvSWeMzU/видео.html
And hi to anyone from Team Crisis finding this channel for the first time! I hope you’ll smash that subscribe button because I know how much you love following health influencers like me and Rohin.
Subscribe you cowards!
I had many centurions in my family on the side and they walk that’s all they did was walk because their jobs were farmers. They were also out nature state food that they grew and so the foods were Whole Foods so their mental health was better being out in nature, they also drink tea, plain regular tea with sugar, and some of them drink some coffee, some of them smoked in the early ages and gave it up and some didn’t drink anything at all
Question on the nice graphs for the steps, but is the grey area not the confidence interval, and if yes, that would mean not that we do no know what is going on, but the confidence in what would go on goes down. Also, the widening intervalls would mean, less people out of the participants fall into this area, with many people managing 100 steps, a bit less 5000, and decent chunk less 25k.
@@sciencefliestothemoon2305 Exactly the right interpretation! We’re not sure what happens, best guess is not much, and the reason is that only a handful of people do 25k steps every day.
@@DrAndrewSteele those lazy people.😁
Would be great to get a larger sample for the higher step group.
Biology has a habit to U-curve on the extremes.
Medlife crisis fans representing 👍🔥
Add me to the list!
🙌🙌
@@MedlifeCrisis Possibly the strongest moustache game in the yt and medical community as well.
That's quite the moustache
Only reason I'm here!
The most important number for your health is your age: the higher it gets the longer you live.
No, the higher it gets the shorter live.
@@marktapley7571Weird. My 80 year old grandpa has lived longer than my 37 year old grandma who I never got to meet.
I am 74 with a resting heartrate of 55 doing about 600 mins cycling / week split equally between zone 2 and above. Favourite Garmin stat is fitness age at 61.5!
doing 10 h per week is way, way more than the average 74 yo. So 61 probably isn't far off.
That moustache. Wow. Not enough comments appreciate it's magnificence.
Lol, looks so fake.
@@micker9830 Agreed. How can a practicing surgeon, who has to wear surgical masks all the time, keep such a large moustache?
This video was recommended to me by RUclips. I thought it was a joke to start with; two blokes on garden chairs with half an upside down skeleton and one ridiculous moustache. However, very interesting. Learnt a lot, thanks.
Haha, the topsy-turvy world of RUclips, where two blokes on garden chairs are legit and yet those inhabiting flashy podcast studios are often, well…
Thanks for clicking! :)
I haven’t finished watching but can attest to the fact that Rohan is very very funny, as well as being a clever medic.
My Apple Watch 4 consistently estimates my VO2max to be below average, at around 35, which is weird since I exercise quite a lot. Then I did a proper VO2max test and my result was above 50. So yes, those wearables' VO2max results can be quite off the mark.
Shave your arms where you wear the watch and wear it higher on the arm
@@Fridelain Thanks for the tip!
Nuts, 50 is still pretty low for a fit person, but yeah thats way out.
@@cyc00000 No it is not, 50 is a good VO2max. According to wiki "The average untrained healthy male has a V̇O2 max of approximately 35-40 mL/(kg·min).[11][12] The average untrained healthy female has a V̇O2 max of approximately 27-31 mL/(kg·min)." Don't confuse the VO2@max numbers for genetic elite from Olympic Games with what 99% of population is actualy capable of.
@@cyc00000 Not so for an average person, particularly above age 45. By all charts, 50 is considered fit for men at almost any age. For an athlete, yes it's low.
At the age of 51 my resting heart rate is in the 50s. I used to see high 40s about 3 years back but that not the case now. I do cardio at least 3 days a week every single week since mid February 2015. Which was the year my father passed away from diabetes. Seeing all he went through his final year from surgeries, amputations, dementia .. was what got me started and kept me going.
Very sorry to hear about the source of the motivation, but great to hear about the end result. Keep up the good work!
@@DrAndrewSteele Thanks. It has been a long journey between cardio, diet changes & work to improve sleep. For anyone who has had a similar experience to what my father went through (or other health condition that scared you) my advice is the changes you make to improve your health will not happen over a short period of time. If you try to make too many changes at once you make it too difficult to be able to accomplish your goals.
@@drescherjm I think this is great advice, and applies beyond the realm of improving health too-doing too much at once and therefore failing at all of it is seriously demotivating. Having the resolve to make lots of small changes over a long time can have its challenges too because it can feel slow, but probably has far better results.
Great to have some motivational reading in the RUclips comments for a change. :)
My resting heart rate is 49 average over a year and my sleeping average is 43 and dips to 36 when sleeping. I cycle about 5 hours a week on average mostly high intensity. But when i used to vape my resting heart rate was 63 and i still did the same amount of exercise then. If you use nicotine daily and care for your health, you know what to do
And after you switched to cocaine, did things get better 😀 ?
Or, rather, what not to do!
He didn't cover what actually begins to happen down in the under-40 club. The lowered risk starts going away rather quickly, sometimes requiring monitoring / intervention in highly-conditioned athletes. The body really doesn't like that state of affairs, either. The old conventional wisdom about "balance in everything" remains excellent advice, and maybe even more so in a world highly influenced by the nut-job voices in social media.
Age?
I think it's more about pulling vapor or smoke into your lungs than the nicotine.
The Dr. makes a good point regarding wearable device data. It’s better to view it as relative rather than absolute measures of fitness. So, if your watch tells you your fitness is improving over the weeks that’s probably good enough, but don’t think the actual number it’s giving you is absolutely right.
Hopefully it's internally consistent.
I think a lot of bodyfat testing is like that too.
Just note the change.
I remember hearing that while the VO2 max estimate on watches wasn't necessarily accurate, as long as it was precise (ie same person same conditions gets same result) it was still a worthwhile metric to see how it changed for you over time. so you don't care about the absolute number, but your trend
There is value in a relative number. As long as better is better and worse is worse. And like mentioned in the video, seeing progress has a positive psychological effect.
Being internally consistent is about all you can hope for at this time.
That's not valueless though as you said.
RHR of 38,57 kg ,57 year old, Smashes The hills,sprints and Zwift for 90 min each day, life is awesome here in New Zealand
Chad af
is it even possible?
Took me a while to notice that something was wrong with the skeleton 😂
I'm 63 and spend about 11 hours a week at the gym doing a variety of aerobic, core, and strength classes. Plus I take frequent brisk walks of anywhere between 2-5 miles. I don't have a wearable and don't have a particular desire for one. All I know is I feel effin' fantastic. I have no idea what people my age mean when they say they feel old. I did just take my resting pulse rate and it was 59 bpm. It would be cool to know my VO2max, though.
As a young adult, above average fitness, more accidental than training, I was textbook 72bpm resting. Once I started winter climbing I really noticed things changing. Was 47/48-ish bpm sometimes in my late 30s and 40s. Now same age as rock n roll and had a rather inactive year for training and hill days but 49-53 bpm resting. Going straight out now for 6000 steps up and down that hill before bed. 😎
My resting heart rate is equal to or below 60 bpm since I returned to mountainbiking in 2020. I'm 40 years old now.
On days that I don't ride my bike, I walk at least 6,000 steps.
as a 25 year old smoker and non exerciser my resting heart rate was high 70s in June 2022, as of December 2022 my resting heart rate is high 50s. It’s strange because in that time period i haven’t changed a single thing, still smoking and not exercising, eating the same meals and weighing the same
Is it possible that you changed the measurement equipment?
Almost all the times my watch has thought I'm exercising hard enough to report a VO2 max have been when I've been carrying heavy grocery bags home from the supermarket, making me seem a lot less fit than I am. Or at least, that's my story and I'm sticking to it!
Haha!
My resting HR is 27bpm, and garmin's VO2 is maxxed out at '60+'
I expect to live to 500
Scientists say the first person to live to be 200 may already have been born. I believe i am that person.
FYI active zone minutes don't work so well if you have anxiety. I easily get over 100 every day I'm in office or anywhere where i socialize a lot. Talking to people raises my heart rate quite a bit 😅😬
220 - age shoud be taken with more than a grain of salt (it sucks)
and zone 5 is absolutely not an all-out sprint. If you did a very short exercise all-out, your heart rate doesn’t reach high, and if you did a long endurance event, you don’t have the energy to get close to max HR for the long time. (sweet spot is ~20 min.) At high heart rates, you should ideally be measuring with the much more accurate chest-based or arm-based heart rate monitors.
I really liked the message from the video about the importance of heart health! We need more people to do exercise, because it’s sad that walking is considered exercise, and zone 2 is considered vigorous, though it is something you should be able to hold all day. (Realistically, when people do more than walking, they go too hard anyway, way past z2.)
Having a Giant moustache restricts your breathing therefore increasing blood pressure.
As a reasonably fit athlete (in my 40s far from elite) I do find this fascinating. I’ve always had a very low resting hr since I started training in my teens at less than 40 and a max of 187 with a functional threshold of 170. Nice to know I’m protected against a lot
How would you describe functional threshold?
@@patrickkalin4437 it’s from cycling, my functional threshold power is around 270 watts, I can hold that along with a heart rate of 170bpm for an hour.
Most doctors do not consider that athletes can have a resting heart rate even lower than 30 per minute. My heart rate now is 36, which is not even included in the graph shown at the beginning of the video. This is a problem when we are to be diagnosed for desies. A resting hart rate of 80 indicates more than twice our baseline but we may be regarded as healthy and missing the diagnosis of potentially dangerous infections!
@@marty197666 I don't know my VO2max & functional threshold; I haven't measured it. But since I returned to mountainbiking, my resting heart rate is somewhere between 60 bmp & below.
Zone 2 training isn't about heart rate, it is about lactate (below LT1, first lactate threshold). Going as hard as possible, while being able to hold a conversation, is the best way to determine it. Which is nice because anyone can do it, even without a heart rate monitor. Other nice thing about zone 2 is that it leads to improvements over time. Most people would start at 70% of their maximum HR, and then, after a few years, move up to 80-85% of maximum heart rate. Which is huge. Unfortunately, lots of people still train in zone 2 by heart rate, which means they will remain forever there without noticing any metabolic adaptations.
Garmin had me at a VO2max of 57 for running, which I was pretty proud of as a 37 yo. Then I did a proper test on a treadmill, worried it that the results would be well below, but turned out it was almost 70! In that moment I realised something. I've always been a homebody nightowl guy who liked to party a bit much, now I'm up at dawn on the weekend training for a marathon PB, and I don't intend to ever stop
70 puts you into Olympic track territory, or at least very close. You didn't get that from partying.
@@briandriscoll1480 that's true, and I think I have full gassing it on my bike after every stop light to thank for a lot of it. Unbeknownst to me I was probably doing many vo2max type efforts every day for a decade before I started looking closer at these things
@@aeriegrove Why did you ride a bike so much?
What are some of your running times/paces?
I'm glad the internet exists so people like you and Dr Rohin Francis can explain things the general public ought to understand but generally don't, even when their doctors try to explain it to them (in less than 60 seconds more often than not due to time constraints). Of course the other side of the card is the horrendous spread of misinformation which sucks.
Completely disregarded the impact of maximum moustache volume on health outcomes 😋
There must have been a reason all the old-school strongmen had exquisite moustaches😁
If that’s a relevant factor, Rohin will live to 100…and I’ve only got a few years left!!
I would say use the watch a week every month, learn from it, apply what you've learned, do the same the next month until you've got good habits going, then just use it every few months for maintenance. Don't use it all the time and let it become neurotic. Remember one part of why lower heart rate is associated with health is that it's associated with less stress, so don't cancel out a percentage of your gains by ruminating over numbers every day
I also want to say that you can get these for about 15 euro, they are accessible for people who can't access expensive health fads
I’m 1.92m tall, and there is no way I can complete 10000 steps in only an hour. My mom and I walk together a lot, for a time we used the same Fitbit model. She consistently gained 50% or more more steps than me. I’m curious if that consideration shows up in any of these studies.
That’s a really good question! I’ve never seen a study that takes that into account (though step counting is definitely not my expertise!) and I suspect because most people are about the same height (‘most’ and ‘about’ are doing a lot of work there…) it probably comes out in the wash…unless you’re super-tall or -short!. Probably a good reason to go with my favourite stat, Active Zone Minutes. :)
Run for an hour and you can.
Of course you can! Try harder
Make smaller steps :-)
Ignore 10k steps. It's marketing by a Japanese fitness company. The only thing your heart cares about is time in zones.
Love this format and the simplicity of your RUclips style. Don’t feel the need to join in the thumbnail mania though hahaha.
How could I not celebrate that moustache
(And thanks!)
@@DrAndrewSteele i already watched the one hour video on Medlife crisis's channel and i only noticed the moustache now after reading this comment
@@therabbithat He wears is so naturally
That really is a nice mustache. I usually don’t like them, but I like yours!
I was told in a chiropractic new patient training to get 30 minutes/2 miles of deliberate walking time daily. I have followed that pretty deliberately for 20+years doing 2-4 miles most days. My resting HR remains about 60bpm. (I try to walk 2.5 miles a day minimum at 17.5 minutes per mile).
Chiropractic??? Medlife Crisis not a fan 😅
7:47 10K total steps aligns with a 60% risk reduction.
7:52 10K purposeful step only gives a 48% risk reduction, yet presumably their total steps were higher than 10K?
This doesn’t make sense, there must be a missing factor somewhere.
I appreciate your attention to data and details, and I look forward to the rest of this wearables series.
A fantastic resource for this is Andy Galpin. He gave great info during a recent guest episode of the Huberman Lab Podcast on how to assess your fitness: protocols, minimal and preferable numbers, etc.
Thanks! More nerdy data and details to come :)
How did I not know about such a great and well put together channel? ❤
I hadn't seen the glorious moustache. Wonderful.
I am now 65. Fitbit has consistently been showing my VO2 Max between 45 and 51 for many years. I was quite flattered by this :) However even if it is 20% off target my current 48 would be 38.4 which is still in the ' very good ' category. I think my Fitbit gives accurate heart rated from resting to about 120BPM and then it is all over the place. Good to see videos like this which bring some perspective and hopefully some detachment from wearable devices.
Regarding how long it takes to walk 10,000 steps, a brisk, purposeful walk for a normal person might be up to 120 steps per minute. An exceptionally vigorous, highly trained walker may be able to achieve 140 to 145 steps per minute. So this is ~84 minutes for a normal person walking fast to as little as 69 minutes for an exceptional athlete walking very hard. If you are running, then getting just over 10k steps an hour is normal.
BLOWS MY MIND ! People are astonished that Fitbit is overcounting steps
ON THEIR WRIST. Wear it above your ankle held in by your sock.
Excellent video! I was just obsessing over my resting heart rate this week.
Amazing video. Thank you for putting so much work in and making things clear
Thanks, glad you enjoyed it! :)
Interesting angle to using fitness devices👍
We need more studies, but no doubt sleep quality is extremely important for our health!
If you are serious about pulse training, you always wear a pulse strap. It gets the max pulse right and definitely gives better precision on the VO2Max estimate.
what a lovely face and positive energy, keep up good work Andrew
One question that hunts me from time to time is : if people that have very bad health can't even walk it , unless they deal first with their internal biology through nutrition ,supplementation and medication first .
Would this mean that those who walk to get these benefits are already quite healthy and with no major nutritional deficiencies , no bad metabolism , well balenced hormones and very low toxicity levels .
Great video, everyone using a smart watch needs to see this
I use to have a resting HR of 80 . . . turns out I had renal cell carcinoma. Now it's 60-65. Lower heart rate does not lower your risk of cancer . . . some cancers literally raise your HR. It's not a RISK but a SYMPTOM.
the moustache and the chairs makes all this serious info look like a joke
@ 0:40 "favorite RUclips cardiologist" ghastly set with rummage sale chairs and skeleton oddly propped between speakers
I’ve always had a low rhr. When I am on a calorie deficit and running it tanks to 50. Overeating instantly raises it. I actually use it a way to check whether I am in a deficit. I think in order to maintain a low RHR you have to be doing all the healthy things anyway. So it’s just a simple tracking thing.
Heads up about the intensity minutes on your tracker. How many you get awarded is dependent on your max HR set on the watch. Check this is closest to what you see on a high intensity runs etc and do not rely on the age calculation which is very inaccurate, especially for the older age groups. Too low and you will get minutes for just washing the dishes, too high and a walk will not show up.
Love my Garmin. It got me doing those steps which then progressed to running. My VO2Max climbed five points over four years. Is in the top 10% for my age group. Data is power. Sometimes the glitches annoy but the forums help to understand and fix issues.
Brb writing a love letter to Rohins stache 😍 Very pleased this popped up, always good to have another insightful creator on my sub list! 👌
Thanks, welcome on board! And send my regards to the face furniture
The Polar H10 chest strap doesn’t use exercise to measure your VO2 max it get’s you to lay on the floor for a set time, and then stand up.
Yes, I almost mentioned this but then decided to keep things simple because most devices do a measurement while you’re active! The H10 (and I think a few other devices) seem to use some combination of resting heart rate and heart rate variability, but from the papers I saw they tend to be (even) less accurate… I’ve been playing around with the one on my H10 and I’ve not quite worked out why but my measurements vary wildly!
@@DrAndrewSteele I don’t know how accurate it is, but I find it tends to match what Garmin predicts. The problem with most of the VO2 estimates is that they need the person to input their training volume on a 1-10 scale. Do you know if VO2 estimates using a power meter on a bike/trainer are more accurate? Garmin will give a separate VO2 estimate for running and cycling and they often don’t match for me.
@@Marty72 I wonder if this might be the issue…I reduced my training volume in the Polar app (after a few busy months) and my VO2 max dropped by 15! LOL.
I’ve not seen any data for bikes/trainers specifically, but my guess is they’d suffer from most of the same problems of indirect measurement-they might be a bit better because they know exactly how hard you’re working because they set the resistance etc, but they still don’t know any specifics of your physiology…
We have numbers on fitness devices that show it does EFF ALL for motivating people to exercise. It's nothing but a entertainment device, now there is a small subgroup of neurodivergent, that seems to require EXTERNAL motivation and that a fitness device might be able to do that, but they are not designed for those users, so it may work in somewhat unhealthy ways.
Calculating an accurate VO2 Max using running data is inherently more difficult for the reasons you mentioned, but devices like the Garmin are getting better at it (as you note) as GPS accuracy and OHR sensors improve, but there have also improved with the introduction of algorithms to calculate running power. It's my understanding that VO2 Max estimates using cycling data are much more reliable because it requires a power meter. The device is not guessing based on pace, which can be influenced by a massive number of variables any more. It's using a metric that provides a much tighter number. Obviously, the calculation can only be as good as the data provided, a dual-sided (or total power) PM is going to have higher confidence than a one-sided.
All that said, the value in almost all of the data that is captured, calculated, or estimated is in looking at the trends more than the actual number.
Dr Francis has an insanely dope mustache
2:50 My theory, from a non-medical person, is that the lower the heart rate the better the health. When I got COVID I noticed it because I went from my normal 50-55 bpm to 80 bpm resting (that was basically my only symptom), so when something is going wrong in the body and it needs to spend more energy for it, the heart rate increases. Also, it could be due to the metabolism. The lower the metabolism, the lower the heart rate, that I think it's my case since it started to go down when I started intermittent fasting (I started with 16/8 and now I'm more like 20/4, but if I have to cheat one or two days, I cheat 😂). When the metabolism lowers, the cells don't multiply as fast so the probability of cancer lowers and maybe the autophagy mechanism is triggered as well, so cancerous cells are killed sooner. Again, this is a theory from someone just curious about medicine and I could be wrong in many of the things I've said!
I noticed this when I had covid too…with almost the same numbers! 70s and 80s bpm _while sleeping_ was pretty wild, and I had some crazy covid dreams…
Great video very interesting, I'd also say that the amount of time sleeping is another very important metric that the watches can measure. Like all the data wearables measure it's not always the most precise. I question its accuracy in measure the different zones of sleep and quantifying the quality with a sleep score but people often neglect sleep when its really important for maintaining and improving health and fitness.
What the hell, medlife crisis rocking that Nietzsche look
I'm a 57yr old woman who likes to cycle. My heart rate rests in the low 40s when I'm just sitting there (on the sofa, not my bike!) (I feel great but nevertheless it freaks me out) and my max hr cycle up a really steep hill is 188bpm.
I don't drink wine or eat late any more because it makes me wake in the night with a 130bpm hr. Very very scary.
Heart rate variability (HRV) seems to be a more important metric to track, yet it isn’t mentioned. Strange.
Yes, not sure what it means. Mine seems not to vary much
@@alanmalarkey HRV is a non specific marker of stress. It correlates inversely with the latter. A low HRV, assuming it has dropped from your baseline, means something is not quite right with your health and your body is struggling to fix this something. The issue could be lack of sleep, psychological stress, impending illness (like a flu starting up) or a chronic health problem or something else. The practical aspect is this. If the HRV has dropped, look for a cause but also be aware that it’s a sign to take it easy that day. This might mean having a light workout rather than a heavy one, more sleep etc..
The problem with resting hr is that some people have naturally lower rhr therefor it doesnt mean they are fit. So it can be very misleading.
Also the best for everyone to use a chest hr for running and get your zones dialled in. If you can run in zone2 faster in the future that means you are improving.
In a way the fake VO2 max from watches is more important, bcs it measures overall efficiency, of which V02 max is only one component.
People want to obsess over these things but dividing things up by quartiles or quintiles, of any of these metrics, is about the highest level of exactitude you can really expect or put some stock in.
I've read that resting heart rate can be genetically low or high but a change toward lower can be an indicator of fitness.
Drastic changes should be run by a doctor though as it can go down or up for non-fitness related reasons.
Comparisons between individuals may not work even though people want to do that so bad!
It may be an internally consistent metric though. So many want it to be an externally consistent metric. It isn't at this level of testing/measuring.
This is a lot like bodyfat testing.
You might actually have a 3% drop but you might not really know your actual bodyfat percentage with the same accuracy as your estimation of drop.
It's still useful to compare yourself to yourself but less good to compare yourself to others which is what so many want.
I'm suggesting that might be something to deemphasize and for more than one reason.
I have watched houndreds of heartbeat videos, but yours are the best. Thanks!!! ❤️
Thank you!
Was looking at the numbers from my apple watch while watching this video, and it's interesting to correlate resting heart rate with what I was doing at the time
I usually wear a chest strap when it comes to measuring heart rate when exercising. Like Rohan, I don't pay attention to it during exercise (I either use feel for low intensity cardio, or pace/power targets for higher intensity intervals, or for sprints I just max out), but I do like collecting data almost pathologically.
I'm not sure how accurate chest straps are however. I assume they are much more accurate than the optical sensors on watches, since they are detecting the electrical signals that cause the heart to beat, but I don't know if they are perfect.
As a side note, the 220-age has always been funny to me. I am 38, and hit a 206 heart rate in a recent interval running session (measured with a chest strap). I like to imagine I have the heart of a 14 year old, but in reality I suspect I have a smaller than average heart compared to my size (1.99m/90kg) and it has simply adapted to beat faster to supply the same flow rate than a larger heart would manage with a lower heart rate. I've heart stories of professional rowers of the same age with max heart rates (and lactate threshold heart rates) varying by 40+ BPM too. It just seems highly personalised.
Anyway, I came here from Medlife Crisis, and have smashed that like subscribe button!
Welcome, thank for the sub!
From what I’ve read, chest straps are essentially as accurate as medical-grade devices they’ve been tested against so pretty trustworthy. You might enjoy the previous video in this series, ‘Can you trust your smartwatch?’ :)
220 minus age is totally bogus. In my thirties I could barely attain 160.
I was a cycling time triallist in my younger days with quite a few wins. It’s about volume delivered, not RPM.
Devices are all over the place as far as max HR. At 67, I can easily crank out 180 without max effort, on my Garmin Epix. On my Garmin Fenix 6 a couple years ago, I hit 190 while cycling. Are those numbers real? Well, 25 years ago in a lab VO2max test, my HR maxxed out at 186, at which point further intense effort became impossible, and I felt like crap afterward. I find it hard to believe I'm still there, 25 years later.
Good video. My problem is the beta blocker (forcing a lower heart rate, after acute heart failure). So me getting to a higher zone on my Garmin isn't achievable. Resting is usually about 50 and a "fast" walk (which I can talk on the phone, for me) is 120 bpm. I have gotten up to 138 on swinging a bush ax and can maintain for an hour tree cutting/ moving wood as an exercise. HBP is my culprit with pill control and I eat healthier with extra salads per day. Vivosmart 4 was a gift from a friend and used since Christmas 2022. Thanks for presenting!
Yes step counters are truly crap at the 'incidental' steps as you said. I bought a cheap-ish Mi-band just to see what the fuss was about. Like you I was pleasantly surprised how accurate it was when walking around outside. But after a few days I realised how shit they were, because it counted 50 steps from me standing at my kitchen counter making a coffee, and another 400 steps just while I showered (probably from washing my hair I guess?)
This isn't a small over-count. Imagine you don't go out and walk much that day, but it's registering thousands of steps while you're making the bed, hanging washing or chopping vegetables. It's show more false positives than actual real steps. Gah, somewhat useless things.
Max Heart Rate does not mean you are completely exhausted. It is something you cannot maintain for long but certainly you can endure multiple efforts at Max HR and continue to exercise for several hours. I know because I have done it. Of course as cyclists like to say you only have so many matches to burn so these repeated efforts will create fatigue but if you are well conditioned they do not leave you completely exhausted!
54 years old , Resting heart rate mine 49 ,correlated VO2 , good to know this , my cac score is 600 , even I think I have a strong heart rate. I should lower my statin mg
One explanation why a lower heart rate = lower risk of cancer is because people who exercise more are also more likely to eat healthy and take care of themselves
One indicator that Fitbit has, within the sleep analysis, is the percentage of time your HR is below resting HR. I find that correlates quite well with how restful I feel about the night of sleep. Like other indicators, it's not so much about the actual number, but a trend over time. Eg , if I realized that this percentage has fallen to low numbers in the past week or 10 nights, I'll try a few things to make myself rest a bit better.
Why can't I focus on the video and instead constantly wonder if it is a real moustache...?
Calorie Defecit + Increased Fitness = Increased Longevity. Who would have thought it? (that's what VO2max essentially measures)
Have you looked at "running power" and the variants of that? Similar role to heart rate, but it's more responsive (in nominal cases), giving you a sense of when you're loading yourself before your heartrate responds to the load. I won't bias by mentioning any brands. I will call out there are several meanings to the term since you can measure power in different places and ways. Related to what you're looking at and possibly an interesting avenue to look at in parallel with it.
For VO2 max, you can do a Cooper test, run 12 min as fast as you can on flat surface (ideally a 400 m running track). The distance covered is correlated to the VO2 max. One of the criticism is that 12 min is very long and it is difficult to sustain max effort for that duration, so it could possibly under-estimate the real value that would be measured in lab conditions.
Interesting, I’d not heard of that before! That’s like a much simpler version of what the watches are doing…I wonder how it compares…
@@DrAndrewSteele Cooper KH. A means of assessing maximal oxygen intake. Correlation between field and treadmill testing. JAMA. 1968 Jan 15;203(3):201-4. PMID: 5694044.
@@DrAndrewSteele Penry JT, Wilcox AR, Yun J. Validity and reliability analysis of Cooper's 12-minute run and the multistage shuttle run in healthy adults. J Strength Cond Res. 2011 Mar;25(3):597-605. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181cc2423. PMID: 20647946. According to this, it is a fairly reliable estimate of VO2 max but only in relatively fit subjects, so not applicable to untrained subject (I suppose running flat out for 12 min needs a relative amount of training to begin with) and doesn't work well on the other end of the spectrum (i.e. professional athletes)
@@RaphaelChaleil Really interesting! And certainly sounds like it makes sense. For example, I’m not sure I’ve ever run as hard as I could for 12 minutes (30 seconds, yes, 5-10k I have a reasonable idea, but 12 minutes?!) so I’d guess I’d improve a bit with practice, knowing how to pace myself. And presumably there’s a discontinuity between running and walking… Interesting that a bleep test doesn’t look bad either! Alas I’m slightly outside the 18-35 range where it’s considered accurate now haha
@@DrAndrewSteele I think this is one of the big flaws of this method, it is almost impossible to be at max for 12 minutes, and a great part of the progress is probably due to better pacing with practice rather than actual physiological improvement (certainly in my case). But I think the cooper formula (VOzmax = (d-504.9)/44.73 with d being the distance in 12 min to the closest 100 m), is based on correlation and implicitly takes that into account. It means that with a lot of practise, the results might get more accurate as there must be a point when improving the pacing is reaching a plateau and the measure becomes then a true measure of VO2 max.
In fairness, have to say, fitness devices on your wrist are just guides in my view. I wear Fitbit Sense, it is not perfect in all categories, specially the heard rate on the long run is questionable, but it gives me an overview of my progress, and it is one of the accurate sleep tracker.
I don't think I've ever gotten an accurate measure of resting heart rate because I ALWAYS get nervous/performance anxiety when it's time to take it, even if just a little and even if I'm taking it myself in a calm environment. So I feel my pulse quicken. I've been resisting getting any kind of wearable but the fact that it's always on and I can't always be nervous about the measurement might mean I get an actually accurate measure.
I get terrible white-coat hypertension and tachycardia (ie my blood pressure and pulse measurements in the doctor’s office are much worse than at home!) so I feel you!!
@@DrAndrewSteele Same here with the white coat syndrome! One thing I've found that helps it be a little more accurate at the doctor's office is to hold/rest your wrist across your chest just at heart level (it's how it's supposed to be taken especially with wrist monitors). Also if you can get there a little early and relax after driving. And you're dead on Ridley with wearing it all the time you can't always be nervous, IMO it's worth knowing and tracking
@@ThePetalesharo Good tips! Alas, to add to the white coat hypertension, once a nurse took my blood pressure after forcing me to run down a corridor carrying my bike so relaxation wasn’t an option!!
So no one is going to discuss what appears to be an inverted pelvis bone on top of the skeleton?
The steps taken around the house are not that important? Please explain why? During the winter 8 do not spend so much time outside and easily clock my 10,000 steps around the house, as I have a spacious house. Is it really not good enough? And why? What am I doing wrong?
It’s not that the fact of being inside matters! As we discuss in the video, the paper looked at ‘purposeful steps’ which I think they defined at > 40 steps/minute, ie walking somewhere rather than pottering about. If you’re striding from one end of the big house to the other these might well be ‘purposeful’ as defined in the research, so don’t panic! And, as I hope we communicated in the video, steps are a good guideline but probably not the best value to optimise for your health. :)
What does risk/probability of death mean? I was wondering because 50% less likely to die this week and 50% less likely to ever die is a big difference. Looked it up and it’s the likelihood that someone will die within the next year. This is typically stratified by age or gender, etc.
There are some studies in males showing that a lot of the age associated loss of VO2 Max is not wholly inevitable and can be mitagated by serious exercise.
I'm a little uncomfortable about how you discussed that part but I enjoyed the video.
Thanks a really useful to know what a cardiologist thinks is worth paying attention to on these devices, I have a Garmin Epix Pro it tells when my sleep is bad. I don't need a watch to tell me I have bad sleep 😀 Also nice to see Rohin sporting the Black Adder General Melchett moustache!
Dr. Francis, the 1890s called, they think you're rocking that mustache.
I am honestly surprised given that face furniture we went a whole video about anti-ageing and he didn’t once try to sell me literal snake oil
That man has a magnificent moustache, rivals even the likes of Nieztsche
For the graph at around 3:00, I wonder if XKCD 2311 is applicable?
Excellent content, thank you !!
You said: while running you make ~40 step per minute. That is 2400 step per hour. 10k mean slightly over 4 hours of running...
Polar was found more accurate than hollter monitor and equivalent to more advanced testing with leads on your chest
Funny () that my low heart rate gives me anxiety and fear attacks. A long way to go with that fear looking at these numbers.
7:11 Hang on. Increasing your daily steps to 10000 gives you an adjusted hazard ratio of -0.59 (great!). Yet 10000 *_purposeful_* steps drops that only down to -0.47 (not quite so great...). So, either those graphs are telling us that 'daily steps' is quite a bit better than 'purposeful steps' - or those graphs have been done wrong. Which one is it? It's odd for you to get excited about something that's apparently contradicting the point you're making....
I did think about going into that but thought it would overcomplicate things… The issue is probably down to which model they use for each graph (ie whether they consider total steps, or split them up, which will change the stats a bit), plus the practical point that it’s very hard to eg get 10,000 incidental steps unless you have a very inconveniently laid-out house! More practical for most people is just to purposely integrate walking into their day. :)
Love youre content, watching it here frome mexico!!!! keep doing more please!!!
Thanks!
I ❤️ rohin bringing his weird skeleton to this video
Would be interested to see your take on heart rate variability (HRV)
I did discuss HRV with Rohin but it didn’t make it into this video! Watch this space because I’ve got that lined up including that but of chat :)
Me too
Bicycles, ebikes, electric cargo bicycles, robo taxis and escooters are great options for last mile, short distance travel.
Reduced transportation costs and fossil fuels free transportation.
Cities need to do more to encourage people to ride bicycles by providing SAFE, PROTECTED BIKE LANES and trails. Every adult and child should own a bicycle and ride it regularly. Bicycles are healthy exercise and fossil fuels free transportation. Electric bicycles are bringing many older adults back to cycling. Ride to work, ride to school, ride for health or ride for fun. Children should be able to ride a bicycle to school without having to dodge cars and trucks. Separated and protected bike lanes are required. It will also make the roads safer for automobile drivers. Transportation planners and elected officials need to encourage people to walk, bike and take public transportation. Healthy exercise and fossil fuels free transportation. In the future cities will be redesigned for people not cars. Crazy big parking lots will be transformed with solar canopies generating free energy from the sun.
You can see how long a distance is and walk or run that distance.
I’m left handed and received an Apple Watch for Christmas. It was showing that I was doing a lot of incidental steps. I wondered if it was picking up the movements I make with my left hand so I swapped it to my right and bingo - the incidental step count came down.
LDL cholesterol, blood pressure and BMI.
great video! I hated the part about resting heartrate, but that moustache made up for it by a factor of 100. I'd pretty much assumed that the masculinity requirements to manifest such a beast were lost to history.
Apple watch is the best by far from multiple tests, comparing many watches. Best sensors by far also for sleep tracking. Just expensive and short battery, unless you can afford the ultra edition.
Agree to an extent…the heart rate measurements are very accurate during exercise but very infrequent during all-day tracking, and I’m loath to not collect a bit more data! They are good watches though, and none I’ve tried/looked into seem to be perfect… :)
Well the answer to this title is obvious based on the guest Rohin...the size of your 'stache is what matters most. I suspect having a pelvis for a head as demonstrated by the background model might factor in as well.
My resting heart rate is 51, and I'm working hard to get it down to the 40s. I'm 40 years old.
Two to go!! Good luck!