Hacker News Reader

Comment by crimsonalucard | Hacker News Reader

I'm quite old. 35. Note that 39 bpm is sleeping, 49 bpm is when I'm sitting down.

Also note that my VO2 max is only superior when compared to normal people in their 20s. Among athletes it's not that great. There are tons of people who run a lot longer than me and are faster than me, but no one I know has stuck to HIIT for a decade.

What is of note is that the 3 day a week interval training pushed my heart rate down waaay lower than normal. Additionally for the past 2 years I've been cutting back on my daily routine and while my endurance has gotten slightly worse my heart rate has not went back up. It's kind of concerning that this exercise has led to permanent changes in my heart. I think people need to watch out about HIIT training, it may not be good for humans in the long term.

View on HN

Hahaha. Quite old.. 35... As someone who will turn 40 this year I guess you will call me positively geriatric! Interesting that cutting back has resulted in endurance loss but not the heart rate going back up. But it is reasonable to suppose that endurance is sort of a leading indicator with resting heart rate following it. My wife has a low resting heart rate since her 20's (never really measured it before that.) She was never a big athlete or a good exerciser. Recently she has started an HIIT program, for general fitness and weight loss. I think we will need to track the heart rate carefully now.

Both of you are kids... I'm 59 and I do cardio mixed with weights. My RHR is 45 bpm, but has been as low as 35. Recently, I had to substitute cycling for running due to a diagnosis of osteoarthritis in my left hip. Sucks, as I love running and it's such a great cardio exercise. Low resting heart rates are nothing to worry about, as long as you're cleared by a doctor and the low rhr is from workouts.

> I’m quite old. 35.

Oh jeez. I’ll just be over here covering myself up with dirt I guess.

> Note that 39 bpm is sleeping

Are you comparing this number to resting heart rate values in literature? Lowest recorded HR during sleep and the value people are talking about when they say "resting heart rate" are very different things.

(Just double-checking possible confusion, because that story about the primary care doctor suggesting to cut down exercise seems really odd. Did you perhaps give that "while sleeping" number to your doctor as a resting heart rate value? That would explain a lot)

The cardiologist said the same thing about that being a strange statement. I think my primary care doctor is trained in Asia and somehow got a license to practice here, so I guess they have a different philosophy? That's why I got a second opinion.

I think what happened is that the doctor finally looked at my recorded heart rate over the 10 years I've been visiting him and saw it lower dramatically.

>Are you comparing this number to resting heart rate values in literature? Lowest recorded HR during sleep and the value people are talking about when they say "resting heart rate" are very different things.

Yeah not sure about this. That's why I gave the 49 bpm when sitting, but I tend to visit my primary care doctor in the morning after I get up when my heart rate is probably mid 40s.

FWIW, I regularly notice that my heart rate's in the 40s when I'm fully alert. I do three- to six-mile runs at consistent pace, not HIIT. And I'm 15 years older than you. But I'm not going to conclude that you're wrong based on my own anecdote. That's what data is for.

Wrong about what.

>But I'm not going to conclude that you're just here to humblebrag based on my own anecdote.

Original quote included the sentence above. Look, I'm not here to humble brag. I'm here to post my own anecdotal experience about my heart rate.

I've clearly stated my VO2 results are not that great when compared to athletes. The focus is my heart rate due to HIIT, aka athletic heart syndrome. This is on topic, not a humble brag. I find your original comment to be hostile in intent.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com