Brand new user of HRV4Training. Without trying to over interpret the initial numbers, I don't know what my 5 day HRV of 6.8 means and my rMSSD being below 20 seems low. I'm sure this will all make sense with more data collected but is rMSSD below 20 concerning for a 71 year old ultra runner?
hello Sherman, thank you for your message and for trying the app. The data looks okay, HRV reduces with age, and what matters is eventually how it changes with respect to your own baseline, in relation to the various stressors you face.
as a followup, i have been comparing my HRV results from my Polar HR chest strap and my Android camera. Camera seems to be consistently higher than chest strap. I accept that chest strap is going to be more accurate but should there be such a noticeable variance. eg chest strap consistently in 6-7 range and camera 8-9 range.
thank you Sherman. Normally indeed there can be an offset, even though what you mention is quite large, and makes me thing that in this case it is better to use the strap, if that is not a problem.
hi Christian, I think it depends. While a suppression always highlight higher stress or a negative response, higher values are not necessarily negative. At the same time, I think it is quite clear by now that "higher is better" doesn't work, as in many occasions we can see very high scores post hard efforts (e.g. ironman events), or other issues (see the example here after an accident, with very suppressed heart rate, and increased HRV: https://medium.com/@altini_marco/data-interpretation-issues-in-wearables-a3942cae82ac). I think that at times, we have this response when the parasympathetic system is very active, meaning that it is working hard, not that you are 'very recovered'. This could explain the examples just made (hard efforts, accidents, etc.). In other occasions, you could see a similar profile, with high HRV, even more chronically, as a functional overreaching state. That means that we still need to be careful, not to overdo it and go into a non-functional overreaching state or overtraining. In practical terms, combining information regarding context (e.g. training) subjective feel, and the data, should help us understand what is going on when we have particularly high scores, even though as you can see, this is often a bit more nuanced than when we have suppressions. I hope this makes sense!
hello Aggie, thank you for your message. I would say not necessarily. In fact, given that the numbers seem very normal in the 18-28 range (age is the biggest factor behind differences in HRV) and how it is more frequent to have some ectopic beats as we age, my guess would be that the data was noisy on those higher numbers.
Thanks Marco! Yes I use the strap as it's easy enough to do and I don't have any repeat requests :)
Brand new user of HRV4Training. Without trying to over interpret the initial numbers, I don't know what my 5 day HRV of 6.8 means and my rMSSD being below 20 seems low. I'm sure this will all make sense with more data collected but is rMSSD below 20 concerning for a 71 year old ultra runner?
hello Sherman, thank you for your message and for trying the app. The data looks okay, HRV reduces with age, and what matters is eventually how it changes with respect to your own baseline, in relation to the various stressors you face.
Check out this article as well as it could be helpful: https://marcoaltini.substack.com/p/low-heart-rate-variability-hrv
as a followup, i have been comparing my HRV results from my Polar HR chest strap and my Android camera. Camera seems to be consistently higher than chest strap. I accept that chest strap is going to be more accurate but should there be such a noticeable variance. eg chest strap consistently in 6-7 range and camera 8-9 range.
thank you Sherman. Normally indeed there can be an offset, even though what you mention is quite large, and makes me thing that in this case it is better to use the strap, if that is not a problem.
How would you interpret spikes above normal range?
hi Christian, I think it depends. While a suppression always highlight higher stress or a negative response, higher values are not necessarily negative. At the same time, I think it is quite clear by now that "higher is better" doesn't work, as in many occasions we can see very high scores post hard efforts (e.g. ironman events), or other issues (see the example here after an accident, with very suppressed heart rate, and increased HRV: https://medium.com/@altini_marco/data-interpretation-issues-in-wearables-a3942cae82ac). I think that at times, we have this response when the parasympathetic system is very active, meaning that it is working hard, not that you are 'very recovered'. This could explain the examples just made (hard efforts, accidents, etc.). In other occasions, you could see a similar profile, with high HRV, even more chronically, as a functional overreaching state. That means that we still need to be careful, not to overdo it and go into a non-functional overreaching state or overtraining. In practical terms, combining information regarding context (e.g. training) subjective feel, and the data, should help us understand what is going on when we have particularly high scores, even though as you can see, this is often a bit more nuanced than when we have suppressions. I hope this makes sense!
I am an 80 year old female. My HRV tends to be on the low side 18-28 but it has been over 4 days, 75, 43,105, 93 then back down to 18.
My question is "did I do something right for my health during the high results"? If so what would that include, as I want to do more of same.
hello Aggie, thank you for your message. I would say not necessarily. In fact, given that the numbers seem very normal in the 18-28 range (age is the biggest factor behind differences in HRV) and how it is more frequent to have some ectopic beats as we age, my guess would be that the data was noisy on those higher numbers.