RHR (Resting heart rate)

Berserker

I just want to clear some confusion that I have about about RHR. The confusion resulted from an interaction I had with a colleague in relation to same.

So, I am in my mid 30s, an active 10K runner with a very clean diet, as reviewed by my friend who is a dietitian. I train 5 days a week but i'm not training hard as of late. My doctor checked my RHR last week and he told me it was 58. I ran a full 10K two weeks ago in 35 mins, as per my garmin watch.

A work colleague of mine attends the same doctor. He is in his mid 40s, a smoker, likes his breakfast rolls, trains 3 times a week (running) and he has an aim to run a sub 50 mins 10K. I went out for a run with him a month or so ago, just before he visited the doctor, as he was on a health buzz before his check-up and 5min/kph pace was a struggle for him; failing the talk-test etc. Anyway, the same doctor measured his RHR and he told him that it was 43, which is peak fitness by international class standards, if I remember correctly.

I am just trying to decipher what exactly RHR means in the above. Is RHR specific to the individual? Is 5min/kmh peak physical fitness for my colleague?

Doug Cartel

He could be winding you up, the doctor might have messed up the reading, or he might just have a really low heart-rate.

I don't see the point in getting worked up about someone else's heart rate though.

Berserker

Doug Cartel wrote: »

He could be winding you up, the doctor might have messed up the reading, or he might just have a really low heart-rate.

I don't see the point in getting worked up about someone else's heart rate though.

No, i'm not, i'm just slightly puzzled by it as I always understood that your RHR was a reflection on your fitness level, as an absolute. i.e. a 30 mins 10K runner will have a lower than a 35 mins and so on.

cc87

How did the doctor record it? What did you do or eat before hand? Lots of things affect RHR.

To check it yourself, strap on a heart monitor first thing in the morning and lie down in bed for a few minutes

Berserker

cc87 wrote: »

How did the doctor record it? What did you do or eat before hand? Lots of things affect RHR.

To check it yourself, strap on a heart monitor first thing in the morning and lie down in bed for a few minutes

That is the way I check it myself, if I need to. Whilst checking blood pressure, he read it from a machine. I have never seen it before myself.

Mellor

Berserker wrote: »

I always understood that your RHR was a reflection on your fitness level, as an absolute. i.e. a 30 mins 10K runner will have a lower than a 35 mins and so on.

Nah, its not like. On average, fitter people have lower RHRs. But there's variation in the individual. Just because somebody is 5 mins faster/slower over 10km doesn't guarantee they'll have a corresponding heartrate.
For example, my heart rate runs a little high. My max heart rate is >220-age. (I never tested it to the max, but I've surpassed 220-age at less than max exhertion.


As for your mate. His RHR is clearly not down to fitness, in which case it should probably be cause for concern. Did he doctor explicitly say it was 43, or was it something he noticed while his BP was being taken?
A abnormally low RHR is called bradycardia, and its defined as a RHR below 50. You mate should look into this a bit more imo.

deadlybuzzman

Mellor wrote: »

Nah, its not like. On average, fitter people have lower RHRs. But there's variation in the individual. Just because somebody is 5 mins faster/slower over 10km doesn't guarantee they'll have a corresponding heartrate.
For example, my heart rate runs a little high. My max heart rate is >220-age. (I never tested it to the max, but I've surpassed 220-age at less than max exhertion.


.

People vary. I'm much like this too but my wife has a resting heart rate in the mid 50s without any cardio fitness. That said she has some seriously fit relatives

Teebor15

My resting heart rate is 38 and when doctors, etc test it they always comment that I must be superfit. Now I am quite active and train regulary with running, cycling and weights, but I'm no machine. 10k in 37 min, half marathon in 1:22, which isn't bad for a 15st lad but as you can see I'm along way from the top.

I was getting (and still do) a weakness or dizzy spell sometimes if I stand up from being inactive for any length of time like after watching a movie. It wasn't of any real concern but I had my blood pressure checked at my next work medical and all was normal. Doctor said everything was grand so I didn't worry about it.

I had did a quick google search which led me to this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradycardia. Which basically says my heart rate maybe low just due to genetics, and my active lifestyle just brings it down another notch. It also says a low heart rate is not always a good thing!

UnknownSpecies

I'm very unfit at the moment and my RHR still hovers at about 45-50bpm. I think it's more to do with my genetics because it's definitely not to do with my fitness.

Oryx

A friend had to get a pacemaker because his hr was too low. My mum has a very low rhr - she is elderly with a heart condition. A low rhr is certainly not always an indicator of fitness. There are many reasons why it can be low, and the impression I get from doctors is that it is often a cause for concern if a person is not obviously fit.

Doug Cartel

Oryx wrote: »

the impression I get from doctors is that it is often a cause for concern if a person is not obviously fit.

I was in hospital for surgery, and every time the nurses took my pulse there would be a bit of a commotion until someone confirmed with them that it was ok that I was under 60 bpm. I don't think I was even that much below, probably about 58. It wasn't a huge deal to them, but their reaction was definitely not "well done you for having such a low heart beat".

(I suppose now would be a good time for someone to make a joke about me not being obviously fit.)

cc87

I can remember being in school and science books reporting average HR being 55-60 bpm. Obviously they wouldn't have been the most accurate books but it shows how things have changed since, and not for the better!

Doug Cartel

cc87 wrote: »

I can remember being in school and science books reporting average HR being 55-60 bpm. Obviously they wouldn't have been the most accurate books but it shows how things have changed since, and not for the better!

In fairness, most people in hospital are old and sick, so the nurses there are going to be used to seeing higher heart rates.

maniac2000

normal heart rate for an adult is between 60 and 100 bpm. A friend of mine is quite fit and has a resting heartrate of 42-45 bpm but it varies from person to person (fitness, what they have ate/drank recently etc etc)

shamrock55

I just tried mine for the craic after reading this, probably not accurate but i checked my pulse on my wrist while using a stopwatch 3 times and was between 53-55bpm:D

walshb

My resting HR is 37-39. No heart issues. It's always been very low at rest.