I was reading up on calculating maximum heart rate and came across a new formula that was the result of a study in Norway.
/www.ntnu.edu/cerg/hrmax-info
They have come up with a 'new & improved ' formula which they feel should replace the current 220-age one.
The new formula proposed is 211-0.64*age (and times this by 60% for CFS)
In my case the new formula gives me a max HR of 108, compared to 103 with the current one. Hmm....
The article suggest there is a lot of deviation for individuals and that one should really determine their own maximum.
In the absence of a stress test it makes me feel like my "number " is not so set in stone.... was thinking of compromising and going with a number in between.
/www.ntnu.edu/cerg/hrmax-info
They have come up with a 'new & improved ' formula which they feel should replace the current 220-age one.
The new formula proposed is 211-0.64*age (and times this by 60% for CFS)
In my case the new formula gives me a max HR of 108, compared to 103 with the current one. Hmm....
The article suggest there is a lot of deviation for individuals and that one should really determine their own maximum.
In the absence of a stress test it makes me feel like my "number " is not so set in stone.... was thinking of compromising and going with a number in between.