Maximum Heart Rate Age

You heard to speak probably of the formula aeoe220-your age" to estimate the cardiac rhythm maximum. Unfortunately, this formula is not very useful because this can be easily of by more than 20 beatings on the top or low side. For me to the age 54 this said formula that my cardiac rhythm maximum should be 166, but I arrive to know of more precise tests than is at least 25 higher beatings than that.

In the books, on the exercise machines, and on the gymnasium walls, you will see often graphs of intensity of suggested exercise that is based on 220-your age. This is also in the adding machines everywhere in the canvas. I would break scarcely a sweat if I exercised to these levels. But in an important way, for some people the opposite is true and their cardiac rhythm maximum can be more than 20 beatings lower than the predicted formula. If they should exercise at the level of the graphs, their intensity could be too high, especially for does not import that with a medical condition.

This formula often is quoted without any warning of this is the inaccuracy potentielle, and what's more inaccuracy, it is has it the small scientific basis [Kolata, 2003]. Some people are conscious that of 220 ages never was wanted by this is original authors to be a universal formula (it was wanted to propose a level of sure exercise for the patients in the cardiac re-education and was based on a not sample very wide of subjects). But the problem is also in the basic assumption as the heart of maximum can be predicted on the only major basis. If you think about him, it seems absurd- without taking account of the family bottom, the health level, if we are big or short, lean or obese, etc, all airplanes exactly the same cardiac rhythm to a certain age, and a declines of cardiac rhythm maxima with the age in us all to exactly the same rate?

More recent studies tried to revisit this concept on a wider sample of the population. For example, in a study, based on subject thousands, the male and the female one, spreading in the age of 18 to 81, the authors proposed a "the better crisis" the equation of:
The cardiac rhythm of max = 208 -0.7xAge.

Nevertheless, if you look at the data this is based on, it seems of a cloud with only a vague tendency towards the cardiac rhythm that diminishes with the age; there is a lot of disperse. The new formula is a little preciser than the old the one, but can always underpredict or HR of maximum of overpredict by 20 beatings more or less [Tanaka, 2001].

A recent magazine of a lot of attempts to propose a formula to predict that the cardiac rhythm of maximum concluded that no sufficient precise formula exists to predict the cardiac rhythm of maximum of only the age [Robergs, 2002]. In my opinion no no is possible because of the big quantity of disperse in the data. Exercise the physiologiste Dr. Fritz Hagerman, that studied rowers of international fame for three decades, said that the idea of a formula to predict that a cardiac rhythm of the individual maximum is laughable: it saw olympic rowers in their 20' s with the cardiac rhythms maxima of 220, and of others on the same team and with the same capacity, with the rates maxima of just 160 [Kolata, 2001].

A lot of books have graphs with the cared ones for plans of training base on the various zones of intensity, all base on the cardiac rhythm maximum. It all can appear very scientific, but this to be not too much value if this is based on an inexact number.

Another false idea I fell on is that the problem with the formula of 220 ages is repaired while using the "the reserve of cardiac rhythm" or the formula of Karvonen. In this formula, this exercise intensity as expressed as a percentage of your "the reserve capacity" between your resting cardiac rhythm (RHR) and the cardiac rhythm of maximum (MHR) :

The cardiac rhythm target = X% of (mhr-rhr) + RHR

Where X% is the desired percentage. This is a useful formula because the intensities of him are related to a percentage of the cardiac rhythm that corresponds to your maximum one updated oxygen VO2Max, that a lot of physiologistes of exercise very much like the usage. But the formula of Karvonen always has need of an estimation specifies of your cardiac rhythm of maximum. If you sink in an inexact number base on an age related the prediction as of 220 ages, the result will always be inexact.

The training of cardiac rhythm can be a useful tool, if base on a good estimation of which one is an intensity level validates for you. The cardiac rhythm maximum precisely can be measured in a laboratory, but mostly of us that is the dear type of an option. You can estimate other useful parameters as the cardiac rhythm to product of the milk thresshold of managed automatically tests (sees for example, [Carmichael, 2003]) and this can be used for the cardiac rhythm based to induce. But for those of us that are interested in especially in health, I question the necessity. I am a "perceived the effort level" the type of guy. On the days cardio easy my rhythm is comfortable. On the hard days, it feels strong, and while doing the intervals, this is very hard. This takes to voucher and constant the progress.

References
-Carmichael, Chris, and Jim Rutberg, The Ultimate Turn: Obtain the Crisis, Obtain Quickly, and Begin Win With the First Trainer of Cycling of the World, Grosset & Dunlap, 2003.

-Kolata, G, "Theory of cardiac Rhythm Maximum Is Challenged", The Page of Health of New York Times, April 24, 2001.

-Robergs, R, and Landwehr, R, "THE History Etonnante Of The HRmax of 220 ages' the Equation ', the Newspaper of Exercise Physiology online, 5(2), 2002.

-Tanaka, O'CLOCK, Monahan, K, the Seals, D, "the Maximum cardiac Effective Foreseen Rhythm Revisited A", the Newspaper of the American University of Cardiology, 37(1), 153, 2001.