Self Test VO2max - 2 easy methods
Vložit
- čas přidán 13. 04. 2024
- Two easy ways to test your VO2max
Rockport Walk Test Calculator ▶︎ www.trainermetrics.com/fitnes...
Cooper Run Test Calculator ▶︎ exrx.net/Calculators/MinuteRun
Full series ▶︎ tinyurl.com/OlderAthleteVideos
FURTHER READING / LISTENING ▶︎ tinyurl.com/OlderAthlete
OR ▶︎ tinyurl.com/OlderAthleteLinks
SUPPORT THE PODCAST AND VIDEOS
Join the Crew ▶︎ / @alwaysanotheradventure
Buy me a Kofi ▶︎ ko-fi.com/sunartmedia
FOLLOW
Instagram ▶︎ / always_another_adventure
Facebook ▶︎ / alwaysanotheradventure
Maps & rides on Komoot ▶︎ www.komoot.com/user/alwaysano...
Strava ▶︎ / strava
MY CYCLING & BIKEPACKING KIT (incl GLASSES) ▶︎ tinyurl.com/mycyclingkit
MY VIDEO KIT ▶︎ tinyurl.com/myvideokit
COMPLIANCE ▶︎ tinyurl.com/AAA-brands
Fantastic! FINALLY someone giving us a good picture of VO2 Max. It isn’t absolute, but the difference is a good measure of the improvement.
This is a great video series - I appreciate the practical info. I recently got back on a bike after a loooong time away and have been watching my VO2max numbers (at least, according to my Apple Watch). I’m not and have never been a “serious athlete” and have no interest in competing against anybody but myself. It is helpful to see a gradual increase in my number… it motivates me to get out early before it gets hot and put a few miles on my bike. Thank you so much for creating these videos for people like me - “older athletes”. 👍
One thing I like to do like the rucksack idea, is I have a pretty well rucksack shaped water jug that holds 10 liters of water. It slides right into my pack. I can put in any amount of water to get the weight I want. Very steep full of water builds leg strength. Less steep but fast can be Max VO2. Slower and long is zone 2 and builds shoulder, back, hip endurance. You can hike a mountain then dump the water to save knees on the descent.
Wholly agree it’s about ensuring you are as healthy as can be , so measuring the Vo2 max is a good thing to do. Over the winter I always drop the Vo2 too many colds , virus’s going around. The spring is when I try to “recover the lost ground” this year I have a way to go….. life has been busy with lots of outside influences stopping me getting on with the recovery. And I was not allowed to run for a year , so just went on road bike exercises …. When the weather is particularly bad this makes it harder…. Now 69 I am well aware the decline is a measure of the inevitable…. Good video … always try to improve ……is the motto
Very helpful video. Thank you, Simon!
Thank you for this series! Four months ago I had a genetic defect with my mitral valve repaired. Now I'm trying to build strength and endurance. I'll be 64 soon but don't see that number as a limitation. Your series is helping me to get a vision of what is possible. Cheers!
Brilliant. I hope the podcasts with the cardiologist and Duncan McCallum were helpful.
Thanks as always Simon.
Interesting and informative content but there's still 50% of me that watches your videos purely out of love of Scottish landscape and being active in it.
My Garmin Vo2 Max numbers are exactly the same as yours but I'm 72 with serious health problems that have only kicked in since 2016 and, although I've been active and fit all of my adult life, I've always doubted the accuracy of what Garmin tells me and consider it a touch on the "over enthusiastic" side.
There's something in what Mike has commented on I think but please don't let this undermine your confidence in your trajectory with this "older athlete" series as it's been a very useful reminder to many of how important it is to keep going.
I look forward to your next piece in this series, especially if you're cycling, running, swimming, walking with Liz, walking your dog, kayaking, feeding chickens, testing kit, maintaining bikes etc., etc., ........ in such lovely landscapes.
Thanks Pete. The next one - “Never too late” goes some way to addressing Mike’s valid points which I took to heart.
A couple more planned for the series then the weather will be good enough for more adventure stuff - in this glorious scenery.
My 20 year old Polar A5 HRM has the walk test built into it, with prompts and direct readout of VO2max. I never investigated or used it, but now that I've seen this video, I'll have to try it out. Thank you!
I like that Cooper test. Thanks.
Whichever way you calculate your V02 max is good, this is your reference point and then try and better it, hopefully Simon inspires a few to improve and enjoy the process. 👍
Always Another Adventure, This is perfect! I subscribed right away!
Thanks Simon. I did a lab test last year and got 42. Then a month later, when my new Garmin Forerunner 265 settled in with my biometrics after two weeks, it started with 1 higher at 43. Since then it's improved with balanced training and consistency to 50 - one yr later. (I'm 60 now)
Hi @seanfrench1029. Can I know what is your highest heart rate for someone with such a high VO2
@edwinsoon6346 my peak is set at 153. I've peaked at 157 recently during a run. Over the last few yrs my peak and Ave has come down for same exertion (mets) compared to even just 2 yrs ago.
Hi Simon! Thanks for the memory. I was in high school, or maybe college, when my dad gave up smoking and brought home Dr Cooper's book. I used that book for some years after as well! I still have a log book around here somewhere, and I am now 67. 😀
As you note the actual accurate and precise VO2 max number does not matter much, the key being to improve. If you have a track nearby, likely 400 meters (or here in the US you might find a 1/4 mile track) it is super easy to either just run 1.6 km (four laps) or mile (again four laps) so you don't have to estimate or measure distance. Just look to keep improving your time, at our age under 10 minutes is "good" (see link). Of course now days almost all of us have some sort of GPS tracking device even if just our phone so distance is easier than when I was a lad doing this.
I can't quickly find a table of poor, good, excellent for us older folks, everything seems to stop at 50 or be labeled as 50+, but if you can do well compared to 50 year olds, good enough!
I will have to look, I imagine you have one, but a video on how older folks can safely and efficiently improve VO2 max would be interesting.
Love your videos.
That’s great to hear about the memories and that you enjoy the videos. How things have changed!
I did a bit about improving VO2max in this video
VO2max and Health-span - why it matters
czcams.com/video/uJgLYg5BNLI/video.html
BUT there’s disagreement about what are the best VO2max sessions. I’m doing more later this week with some sports scientists so hopefully will know more soon.
58 male and do Cooper test every year spring and autumn. Garmin 255 says 52VO2max and Cooper test 51.5. Pretty similar.
OURA ring just added a VO2 max test to their line up. It consists of a 6 minute walk outside and tracks your distance then gives you your result. I have no idea how accurate it is...but was pretty pleased with my first attempt. Plan to do it weekly for a while.
Coopers test can be done two ways, 1. How far you go in 12 minutes, or 2. How fast you can do 1.5 miles.
Such a cute WHT doggy. I had 6 in my lifetime. They are great running buddies with good endurance. 😊
I regularly use a sub-maximal fitness test to obtain a comparative measure of how i'm doing. I simply cycle for 45 mins at fixed, but not max power (turbo trainer best but any consistent and repeatable acivivity will wotk) until my heart rate settles out and use that heart rate as a fitness measure. Works reliably for me when trying to judge fitness for an event etc. The number will clearly be different for others but if rqd can be converted to an appx VO2 max using an Astrand-Rhyming scoring chart.
Thanks for these two exercise / VO2max tips.
I am and have been using a power meter on my bike and a chest HER strap over the past 5 1/2 years and my Garmin reports a VO2max of 38. I will see how your tests correspond to this number. However, I am similar to you, not really interested in the absolut number but how it changes and goes down 😧over winter and how it (very) slowly creeps up again in spring / summer. But it seems clear that this recovery becomes ever more difficult as I am entering my 70th decade. My highest VO2max was 44 around 4 years ago. Thanks for your excellent and very helpful series for older athletes!.
BTW, I have booked an exercise ECG/VO2max test at the Hampden Soprts clinic to ensure that I don't overdo it following my CABG 8 years ago..
That’s a good plan Robert. Please tell them you watched the video too 😁
Agree with your main point that the important thing are changes on the same device rather than the actual number. I’m assuming my Garmin number is a bit generous but will try one of these tests to compare. Enjoying the series.
Good content thank you!
There might be a weather factor in winter vo2max decline. A fenomen I experience too. My theory is, when the surface is muddy, snowy or wet we all run slower with the same puls. This thing can no smartwatch measure. Some work - in the physics meaning- is lost. Work means oxidation which is o2 usage. We put out a work against the ground which is lost when we measure speed and distance. Hence the decline.
great work thanks
Very timely...... Thinking of doing one of these myself for the first time (43)
Very very informative i'm glad you made this video. 👏👏
Glad it was helpful Roger
As always, very helpful and very practical. Perhaps you want to address VO2Max vs Anaerobic Threshold and FTP? Keep up the great work for us older athletes.
On its way. Just did the test last week in Edinb lab.
Thanks!
Thanks very much for the support!
Excellent...will do the walk today...!
I like your approach. I use VO2 Max est from my Garmin watch, but I've started focusing more on my Lactate Threshold HR estimates (e.g,. tested with a 30 min hard run), bc I think you can estimate it more accurately than VO2 Max.
Great timing - I’ve just had lactate thresholds tested in the lab ahead of doing a video on exactly this.
Excellent content here. I'm turning 47 this year, so would nit yet consider myself an 'older athlete'. But there's a lot of useful information in this series nonetheless. I think anyone training for longevity, rather than athletic performance, will benefit from this even in their 30's and 40's.
Thanks - that's certainly the approach I'm trying to take.
Yes I suspect my Fitbit is a bit generous with my V02Max score . Will have to try both of these and see how they compare with my watch.
Hi Simon great video, did a vo2max at Loughborough Uni lab at age 49 with my daughter who is now a sport scientist. It was 49.95, i did another on my Concept2 rower 2 days ago (I'm now 62) it was 38.25 although i definitely could have pushed myself more, the rower is only an estimate, i will do both tests in the next few weeks. Garmin has me at 40 vo2max we'll see thanks again!
This sounds familiar Neal! I too did a VO2max in my 40s when it was 47. The two self-tests (estimates!) in this video were about 36. Garmin and Apple Watch around 45. Last week I did another lab measurement at 45. The watches were pretty close in my case.
I just wanted to ad one other comment on training for 'us' older athletes. My main sport is cycling and I regularly do solo rides of 50 to 100 miles where I end up with average speeds of around 19 to 20 km/h and an average power output of 100 Watts for a 100 mile ride (I have a power meter on my bike). I've tried group rides a few times and always found them to be too stressful since the rides are too fast for me. Even just 1 or 2 km/h faster will exhaust me in a short period of time. However, going at my own speed I can go for long periods of time. This is just to say, don't measure yourself against others, we are not in a race and we are at an age where we no longer have to poove ourselves against our peers. Each and everyone of 'us' has his own lifes history and background and we enjoy what we are doing be at an VO2max of 20 or 50.
I will be inevitable that he numbers go down, there are only a very few individuals in the world who have the fortunate genetic makeup to make them athletes into their high ages but we don't have to emulate them, but just enjoy what you have.
👏👏👏
Glad to hear it's not just me, re being able to really notice slight differences in work level, having a big cumulative impact on effort / fatigue.
My main exercise is walking, but the concept definitely applies.
What's reassuring and pleasant is that just like 40 or 50 years ago, keeping at it with moderate exercise produces meaningful results re improvement (the delta slowing as you get more fit, of course).
I’ve been getting fitter but my VO2max reading is the same. The only time it changed was it decreased considerably when I concentrated on Zone 2 training about 18 months ago, dropping from peak 48 to 42 in just a couple of months. I paused zone 2 training for two weeks and did stride and tempo runs and it’s climbed back up to 47. Therefore I have little faith in the measurements by wearable devices. I know I’m fitter nevertheless through performance: race times, perceived effort and my zone 2 pace getting quicker, albeit measuring HR on the wearable device.
I’ll do the Cooper test out of curiosity but I understood the estimates were based on data obtained from US military personnel, hardly the over 60s category. I may even try the walking one but that’s one I’ve not heard about. Thanks for the info.
The only ones I've found for over 60s are those aimed at people who couldn't run, so hardly applicable. We're a new breed! 😁
One option I've used to gauge fitness was a 12minute run and pulse rate checked every minute after finishing. Over a series of runs, the time to reach a base PR should be quicker showing an improvement.
Yes, recovery rate is a useful metric.
....good lad!
Hey mate. I'm 60 years old and out of shape. Hopefully this will work for me
Any idea why age is included in the two methods of estimating? Surely performance and weight are all that matter for VO2. Just because VO2 goes down with age surely doesn't mean age should be included in the calculation. Evaluating the reported VO2 max is when age needs considering, I would have thought. Also, my watch measures my performance whenever I go out for a walk or a ride but, here in Caithness, my walking is usually on tussocky ground and my rides are on a 36 inch wheel, steel touring bike, frequently into a head wind. I get what you say about seeking improvement but having scores lowered by a device which is failing to include context is a little disheartening. Fortunately, my power numbers are going up on the indoor trainer. This series of videos is very valuable. Let's hope the word spreads.
We looked into this - the calculators include it but it’s not part of the equation, so perhaps for some extra ranking or data?
@@alwaysanotheradventure Thank you.
Your watch is + or - 50% wrong for starters out of the box. It’s only a guesstimate.
Your Age has a relation to overall reduction in general performance compared to you as a much younger person.
But I get your point.
Vo2 max reduction is a longitudinal decline of all your organs tissues basically HOWEVER the amount of decline can be reduced with exercise.
For instance you get wrinkles as you age as a Key indicator of decline 😀
"Raging against the decline"....I so feel that. But you have to use that in a positive way....as you know. Worth looking at age related % s for race distances. Canbe better than one imagines!
For any serious physically stressful competition, like race walking, running, weight lifting, etc, things like age (for cardio related) and body mass (for throwing around weights) matter a LOT. And for obvious good reasons.
There's no shame in that. I also wonder if things like chess ratings (mental health is important to me too), I also wonder if those should somehow be adjusted for age. My speed, memory, and endurance, for example, are a LOT less in total than they were 40 years ago when I was VERY active in tournaments.
Very interesting work. Thank you. Non-runner and non-walker, I’ll be interested in self tests for cycling. Any leads to a feasible test regime?
Working on this!
If you have an indoor trainer programme that allows you to create a "workout" (e.g., set certain wattages for certain periods of time), you could feasibly replicate a submaximal trainer test that uses power output and heart rate. The American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) has a few on its site, or you could just Google, for example, The YMCA Sub-Maximal Cycle Ergometer Test (I think there are probably CZcams videos for this, also).
In the "old days", we'd add weights to a basic bicycle ergometer, and ask participants to pedal at a specific cadence in order to achieve a certain power output in kilopond-metres per minute (which is directly related to to Watts), and every 3 minutes (or whatever protocol applies), increase resistance and measure HR again. Now we have Zwift ergometer mode to replicate these old-style test protocols, you no longer need paid exercise testing professionals to do this for you - although they clearly have expertise to help you with more than just running the test.
(I realise you probably meant an outdoor cycling test, but I have never come across a reliable one).
@@davidrowe8747You replied before I had the chance to ask you David! 😂.
VO2 max test in a lab is not about reaching maximum heart rate - that is incorrect. It is about reaching a point where your VO2 consumption reaches a plateau. This is usually below actual max heart rate.
My VO2 max HR was 151 (I reached the plateau), but my actual HR max is 159.
The vast majority of people doing a lab VO2 max test give up before they reach the plateau.
P.s. as someone approaching 60, love the channel
Good point.
(Is that "vast majority" people over, say, 50, or all people? Because, generally, fitness declines a LOT over the decades for people who are mostly sedentary.)
I'll be honest here Simon. I watched this a couple of days ago and left no comment (or like) so I could give all of this some thought.
When you floated the idea of this older athlete series some time ago, I was very much all in favour; you're pulling together a lot of stuff I already follow and the message is the same but .... some of this is actually scary.
I'm not quite 60 and feel I'm already too late but, will a 30 year old be watching this - I hope so- because if like me, they've perhaps 'seen the light' a bit too late, then my figures give me little hope for what's left of my future. I don't mean that to sound too bad as I know full well that many of my friends and relatives have almost certainly had poor VO2 max (and other measures) but done very well and lived independently until a late end. This is all about probability. There is no question that VO2, strength, flexibility, social contact, etc. increase probability of independent living and I'd encourage that take, even if, like me, you sometimes feel you've left it too late.
You've clearly kept in good shape from an earlier age, how about a bit of hope for those of us who either didn't, or are now facing issues which hamper activity through no fault of lack of exercise or lifestyle.
I don't mean to sound ungrateful or negative, and no doubt other members will comment on this, but maybe there is a bit of a 'tone' developing here that if you're not VO2 this number or can't stand up from sitting cross-legged, etc. then you'd better prepare yourself for being cared for sooner rather than later.
What you say is of course largely correct and we all need to hear it, but we are talking probabilities, not absolutes and maybe that's not coming across as clearly?
I really appreciate you taking the time to express this so clearly Mike. I don't want to put people off activity, and I certainly don't want to come across as smug - but it sounds like I'm on the edge of both.
Because you're right, none of this guarantees a long healthspan, nor does an alternative, less active route guarantee the opposite. Bad stuff happens, whether that's accidents or chronic illness. I'm aware I'm dealing in population size numbers.
The interview with Doc Murray - video number 16 which yu should be able to see - hopefully goes some way to starting the idea that it's never too late. I have another video with him that's going to explicitly state this 'Never too late' idea, talking through the benefits of starting (or increasing) physical activity at any age.
Thanks for pointing this out. I'll remember it.
@@alwaysanotheradventure Thank's Simon. It really isn't a criticism, as I still believe this series is very worthwhile and you're doing a great job in bringing in some very knowledgeable people with sound messages. I think the 'never too late' element is crucial and I suppose I'm also wondering how you could make this series more visible to the 30 somethings? The titles alone would maybe make them give it a miss; but there's an important message here which wasn't available to me 30 years ago which should really go out to those people now.
The application of a public health message to a single individual is always going to be fraught with risk like this. The point is that your number is your number, and it can probably be improved, but you need to measure it in a consistent way to see a real trend (&we're all ultimately trending down!🫣) (whether the starting point is 15 or 55).
@@keithmaclure9101 Shouldn't you be training...? 😃
@@alwaysanotheradventure was watching during lunch, but yes! 🫣🤣
Wonder how the results of these are compare to the proper Vo2Max test you did in the lab (in your video)? Great video thanks
Check out this video Gareth czcams.com/video/rjYqwcA8XdE/video.html
👌
I did a Rockport walk test a few months back, it was not easy! I'd much rather run a mile flat out than walk one as fast as I can.
I hear you. I've had some intermittent joint inflammation issues which seem consistent with mile RA (with RA factor consistent with that), for 43 years now. And whether 30+ or 60+, when attempting anything approaching racewalking for a meaningful distance (like, say, a mile or more), my limitation is very much my joint fitness, NOT my cardio fitness.
I suppose this kind of thing likely is strongly impacted by one's personal health, personal exercise history, etc.
At 65 this month, I'm hoping that doing the right things re diet and moderate exercise including (non-crazy levels of) HIIT training will produce good-enough results re maintaining relative health longer that the details aren't worth getting excited about (vs. the common tendency toward inactivity and a relatively poor diet (the "Standard American Diet" as the classic example).
I live in Colorado at 5,500 feet. Is there a conversion factor for these tests - the 12 minute run test in particular?
Crikey - no idea, sorry. I relise that will make some significant differences.
what was the device you used to set your timer and distance? what heart rate monitor strap and watch do you suggest?
Any smartwatch would do Dan. I just used an old cycling computer (Garmin Edge 1030) so the screen was big enough for the camera to see. I haven’t done enough comparisons of smartwatches to recommend any specific ones, sorry. @DCRainmaker is the best channel for that stuff because it highly depends what activities you want to do. Mine is an ageing Garmin 745 with Garmin HR strap but it’s unlikely to be the best option now.
@@alwaysanotheradventure thank you for replying. I have a polar strap yet no watch (it broke). I have a highschool track I can use for the distance measure, yet need to acquire something for the heart rate. I am going to try this out on my gym treadmill which can measure my heart rate from the polar strap and the distance.
Could you do the walk test as a warm up then the Cooper test?
I suppose it depends on your relative fitness and whether it’s a suitable warm up. It would be too strenuous for some and not enough for others.
@@alwaysanotheradventure thank you. I’m pretty fit so it would be interesting to give it a try.
Sorry if I came across rude in my initial question.
I only found your videos recently and love the way you put them together and explain things. Great voice as well.
You would make a great reader of audible books.
It would be interesting to hear some theories on athletes with heart conditions if you get a chance.
I run a marathon every year for the last six. Keep fit and visit the gym training one way or another most of the week.
I was diagnosed with a bicuspid heart valve a couple of years ago.
I was always keeping fit before that so it was a bit of a shock. No symptoms just an ECG chart that didn’t look good to a cardiologist but looked fine to three doctors.
Thanks again for the answer. Appreciated. 👍
Is it possible to follow Heart Rate based training if one has a heart flutter? Thanks
That’s a question for your Doctor - personal advice is always better for medical questions
Hello - vo2 max as u know probably can be absolute or relative. Think in lab measured as absolute vo2 max with mask so as L/min. Then can use total body weight or weight less fat or just muscle weight for getting relative vo2 max so then ml/kg/min. Not seeing how u factored this into your number? Please could update more. Thanks so much.
I just did the tests as described by those who devised them.
Does VO2 max assessment differ depending on if you’re a 200 pound 6 foot tall muscular guy or 145 pounds 6 foot tall wimpy runner guy? I was a sprinter in college many years ago and I was never good at running long distance so this timed running test doesn’t seem like it captures everything for fitness.
True measurement will be accurate, estimates probably less so. They’re all a function of body weight. ml / kg / min.
Obviously the smart watch V02 Max estimate was more accurate than the examples you gave.
Simon, thank you for the video. Have a quick question please. For the 1-mile test, heart rate has to be taken 10 seconds after the finished line. I presume we stop walking right at the finish line, meaning that the heart rate, during this 10 seconds period, is going to fall. What is the purpose for this 10 seconds period exactly ? Thank you in advance.
-Jean, from Hong-Kong.
Honestly - I don’t know! I looked up a range of protocols and this seemed the clearest non-maximal test.
@@alwaysanotheradventure Thanks Simon. Just did this test, it says VO2Max 42 (my Garmin watch says 47). Interesting.
Can I do that on a treadmill? Since outside temperature is 42C and it is impossible for a 65 old man to push hard on this temperature
Yes - there are several online versions. I linked to a couple.
I have a Garmin watch that shows me my heart rate, and I’ll also have a polar heart rate strap on at the same time seeing a difference. There is at least an 8 bpm difference where my Garmin watch could say 101, but my polar heart rate strap might say 90 when doing my 3.5 mile brisk walk Each morning averaging about 4 mph. I am 72 years old 5’9” tall, 167 pounds. Which should i use?
Is the Garmin watch is corrected to the Polar strap too? If so that’s amazing they’re registering different figures.
However, if the Garmin is using the wrist based sensor I’m not surprised because they are notoriously unreliable. Mine recorded a figure in the high 190s on a casual easy walk. The only wrist sensor I’ve found comes close to accurate is the new AppleWatch.
@@alwaysanotheradventure no I have a Garmin wrist watch that also shows the heart rate. It is not connected to the polar chest strap.
@@kwc7391 That explains it. Wrist based sensors are woefully inaccurate. You should be able to connect it to the polar for greater accuracy.
@@alwaysanotheradventure yes I was just wondering. I just got the new Polar heart rate monitor and chest strap and when doing my walk, I noticed a big difference between my Garmin watch and the polar heart rate monitor. Thanks for getting back to me.
I don't understand people doing the Cooper test. How do you know how far you have really run? How accurate is your distance measuring instrument? Every time you check it during your run, you can't help but slow down. If there was a running track with markers every yard, that would be ideal, but where are you going to find one? The Walk Test is more practical.
None of this is ‘accurate’. It’s all just an estimate if you’re not in a lab on a metabolic cart.
Im in my 50s and dont run . Ran 3 miles 2yrs ago but got injured , so for me theres no way the running vo2 test would be accurate for me as i couldnt run 100m 😅. I do however ride a bike for hours and can walk so may try the walk test . If i use scientific research vo2 calculators online using max over resting heart rate x 15 or another one that uses , age , weight and resting heart rate they come in about 46vo2 and 39vo2 respectively so i giess i am some where round that score . Though i notice if i change weight and resting hr by 10 on either there is not that much change to the vo2 scores
i wish there was a 45 or 60 minute cycling test that could give us a VO2 max number just like this 12 minute running test.
Anything other than a lab is at best an estimate. Zwift comes up with a figure (mine is way out because I don't use it much). And there's also this www.michael-konczer.com/en/training/calculators/calculate-vo2max
Why not compare the smartwatch reading to the lab reading (the same day) to see how accurate the watches are?
I’ll do something like this in the next video coming Sunday.
It’s not quite the same because I believe (the companies don’t explain how it works) the Apple Watch and the Garmin watch plus Edge 1030 base their reading on cumulative efforts, short and long, easy and hard.
It doesn’t really matter if there are a few days between because if you’re reasonably fit, it takes quite a few weeks to move the dial upwards through exercise. Down comes quicker.
If you’re not particularly active then improvements come faster and are more noticeable.
@@alwaysanotheradventure many thanks, much appreciated and I look forward to reading your findings - and continue following your channel
My biggest issue with the Rockport one is that I can only walk so fast before I feel like it's an utterly unnatural gait and I should be breaking into a jog/run- and that's around 3.75-4 mph(and maybe 110bpm)...the site I looked at had someone as an example doing an 11.5 minute mile with HR at 160...that's a jog to many and 5.2mph which I doubt many people could do walking!!
You'd be surprised! I used to administer a 1-mile walk test to undergrad students as part of a fitness class in the general student population (US university). 11-12 minutes was, from recollection several decades later, about the fastest score I remember. Race walkers can actually go much faster than that, but as you have recognised, biomechanical limitations affect older folks more than younger.
Both practice and joint health / overall fitness (re muscle tone) has a LOT to do with this, based on my experience, as someone with significant intermittent inflammatory joint pain issues for about 43 years now.
I could be wrong, but I'm going to try some "HIIT training for senior citizens" work, based on reading I've done on interval walking training and its results on overall fitness and biomarkers, vs. just walking longer.
I am hoping to make some meaningful progress over time, re how well I can walk fast for a minute or two at a time (over many intervals), without trying to reach actual racewalking proficiency (which I have no interest in if it's too hard on my hips, knees, feet, etc).
My body doesn't like the pounding of running, even jogging small intervals, which is why I'm excited to try the HIIT with walking, and facepalming that I didn't consider that on my own, vs. finding it quite by accident on the net.
For quite some time, I have had no indication of Vo2 on my Garmin watch.
Don't know why, I was told Garmin doesn't indicates it any more.
Garmin Connect has just had a refresh and it's front and centre in the new App design. You might need to use a HR strap with your watch to get the reading but that's something to check with Garmin
Is that a Fox Terrier I see?
Yes - we were looking after him for a week. My Border Terrier is way back!
@@alwaysanotheradventure thank you for all your excellent videos. Glad to see the Foxy enjoying your company; we lost ours on 20th March after 16.5 years... they leave a big gap. Keep safe, Simon
Is there a simple cycling test?
If you have a cycle computer, check to see if it has an FTP test. My Wahoo has a couple, although I think the tests described in this video are probably easier.
Working on this.
Is ftp the same as vo2 - 😊I was under the impression they are different.
@@swifty0000007 no, it is not. It is the maximum power output you can maintain over 60 minutes, so not the same as VO2max. Also, FTP metric is Watts (which could feasibly be converted to VO2), but what it is essentially giving you is an anaerobic threshold value, not a max value.
@@WhaJMc FTP test will help you understand your fitness level, but doesn't give you a VO2 max value.
The estimates on the smart watches (44 and 45) looks pretty close to 47 measured in the lab. The two other estimates were quite wrong. I think the actual number does matter, because a small improvement in VO2 Max from a low base will significantly improve your chances of staying healthy into old age. But a small improvement from an already high figure will make little difference. You need to know how your VO2 Max compares to the general population.
We disagree on this
according to my 12 minute mile test, i am barely alive
Great to have room for improvement Elaine 😁
It's all relative. Given the fact you even have the interest to DO that test (and hopefully are doing SOME exercise weekly, like moderate walking), it's got to be a good sign compared to say, couch potatoes, who can't stop eating ice cream and potato chips long enough to take a moderately vigorous walk of a decent length a few times a week.
And then depending on your age, other health factors, etc, try not to be too hard on yourself.
I was mostly sedentary for too long -- spurred to action by warning signs from my body, and am just delighted that just like as a young man, my body definitely does improve with regular exercise, even moderate exercise, if I just DO it and have a decent diet.
I can't even safely run 12 minutes. I'm not ashamed of that. HIIT with racewalking as the high intensity mode is my plan to improve, and hopefully get to a decent time with that test, over time. At age 65. I'm STILL more fit than most Americans over 60, and it's about quality of life over the aging decades, NOT trying to be anything resembling a "serious" competitive athlete.
@@rogergeyer9851 Thanks so much for the kind words of inspiration. I exercise daily and eat lots of healthy food..definitely not the standard american diet. I guess I am not too out of shape for my late 50s. Thanks so much for sharing your story.
Still trying to rage a bit here, best wishes.
If VO2 max is largely a function of body weight and aerobic capacity it sounds like the Attia data is suggesting that people with normal, healthy, bodyweight that can regularly engage in "zone 2" and more intense exercise, along with some resistance training are healthier later in life. I like Peter and research based fitness but isn't this all a bit common sense? If I am not fat and I regularly exercise I am probably very fit without needing to measure VO2 max. I am not old, 61, but train regularly, mostly boxing with 20 year olds and I do well (not gassed). 5' 9"" and 73kg. 25 chins in a row with no problem. Bench 80 - 85 kg. Approximately 30 minutes for 5k, maybe a bit less. I suspect being lean and moving regularly is all we need.
In a way, yes. No testing or self-assessment is needed if you’re truly confident of fitness and heath. In later life confirmation can be reassuring, or indeed a nudge to do more.
Thanks for this video, Simon - really educational, and I hadn't heard of these tests.
I was wondering what you think of the Harvard Step Test? I have been using it (as it seems like the simplest of all?).
I would love to hear your thoughts on my project in general, and especially my vo2 max increase. You can see my first "report" video here: czcams.com/video/dEDglG7eSpo/video.htmlsi=ojCBEfU0q2H7s5CU
Hey Angus - great to use your time like this. Similar to me except my ‘free’ time is retirement.
I haven’t heard of the Harvard Step Test but I’m no expert. One of my channel members is a PHD who literally wrote a text book on this and keeps me right.
I think he’d say the test is a great way to compare yourself with yourself over time (as you do in that video) but not to compare yourself against others or an established scale. Those scales use Norm Reference Standards based on tests done in labs with metabolic carts.
Anything else is just an estimate - Garmin says as much in all their website.
The rate of change of VO2max (improvement) varies with starting point. Very unfit see faster gains. But many other things change day-to-day; rest, hydration, fatigue and - crucially- knowledge of how to do the test. The last one is especially important (and applies to FTP and ramp tests and more) because you learn how to pace your effort. You get better at doing the test.
One production point. You talk very well to camera, no long pauses and not too many errs and y’knows. Your eyes flick from side to side rather than holding my engagement and that can be disconcerting.
If you’re doing this on your phone, may I suggest you put a coloured dot on the phone case near the selfie camera and talk to that dot? Either that, or put the camera further away and talk to your own image but zoom in to disguise the eyeline?
I’ve subscribed and will drop in occasionally to see how you’re doing.
@@alwaysanotheradventure Thanks so much for the detailed reply, Simon! I really appreciate it.
Your feedback on the camera looking / eye contact thing is seriously useful too, it's something I was wondering about but wasn't sure on a solution, and so will definitely use your advice!
On the Harvard test: it does seem right that it's probably not extremely accurate, but does a good job of benchmarking myself against myself, which is all I really need for now. Maybe I'll try one of your tests, or maybe go to a lab at some point. Seems really interesting! Do you set yourself volume goals at all? Purely in the sense of time?
Thanks again, and please do share any more feedback or general thoughts along the way!
You are using the wrong words. The problem/confusion is because some like Garmin use the Word “Vo2 max”, which is in fact fitness level (which is Vo2 max/weight). Vo2max is numbers like 4000, and fitness level is like 60.
This has been checked by two PHd level academics , one of whom wrote the text book in this field, so I’m happy it’s accurate
@@alwaysanotheradventure You really should read the theory behind the terms. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VO2_max
I do not compare what I can do now to what I could do at 30. I am 66. I do compare what I can do to other 66 year olds. Its a more realistic target. There are some very fit and able ultra athletes over the age of 60.
If you mean compare VO2max, you’d have to have a lab measure and so would they (or use normal reference values). The value is in comparing yourself today with next month - have you improved or declined. We all need to improve regardless of how we compare to others.
unnecessary. just measure your resting pulse upon waking while still in bed. anything under 60 is excellent and points to a strong heart and high vo2 max.
Really? Wow. Can you show me where this has been validated please? I'm keen to learn more.
@@alwaysanotheradventure there's a direct correlation between low RHR and high vo2 max .
Ah OK - yes I take you point regarding fitness, and understand the correlation but you can't track VO2max improvement in this way. If that's metric you find helpful then that's great.
No. Don't make such flat assertions based on assuptions, anecdotal data, or guesswork.
I take a beta blocker. That makes my heart rate at rest AND exercise MUCH MUCH different than it would be otherwise. I can say this from 34 years of experience, reading, consultation with my GP's and cardiologist, etc.
And that's just ONE example of something that can have a MAJOR impact, re your claim / assumption.
For another example (having recently had some heart testing including a stress test with lots of monitoring / scanning) -- there's a REASON cardiologists want to use STRESS level tests for a lot of diagnostic work re heart health. What's super-obvious is super-obvious.
@@rogergeyer9851 _of course_ if you're taking some type of pill(s) that effect your heart rate then you can't use my method. I'm referring to the other 99%. for them, there *IS* a strong correlation between testing HR and VO2max.
VO2max is an essential measurement, that unfortunately declines with age. I'm no expert, but my understanding is that in well-trained athletes VO2max is not responsive to training. What is trainable is performance as a % of VO2max. With all these easy smart watch estimates, I suspect that short term variation is mostly noise. See czcams.com/video/otNngp1u-Ls/video.htmlsi=jJOG_Ai5CF4kZPcH
Three points there Steven, and thanks for making them. And I'm no expert either - so I bow to the likes of Prof Seiler to whom you linked. I'll go watch that video soon.
1. Yes VO2max declines with age, but it can be raised. There are studies on this,but a great example was in 2012 when Robert Marchand set an age group record for The Hour (24.25km) at the age of 101. Not satisfied, he followed a training programme and by age 103 boosted his VO2max form 31 to 35 ml/kg/min and broke his own record. From my reading, VO2max - not just performance - can be boosted, but I'd read any contradicting research with interest.
2. Yes, there are marginal returns. Going from nothing to doing something makes a big difference, and going from doing a little to doing more makes the biggest difference. This is coming in next week's video to encourage folk to start.
3. There's a lot of disagreement of the value of smartwatches because a) they're still relatively new and have only significantly improved in the last couple of years and b) the companies don't share their algorithms. I've listened to Steven Seiler debate this with the guy who worked on the guy who pioneered HRV and revamped the Apple Watch (damned if I can remember his name). Short answer is - you might be right and it might be noise. The sleep metric is useless as are some of the wrist-based HR measures (I always use a strap). But anecdotally (N=1 😁) it does seem to objectively track my subjective feelings.
So much more to learn....
@@alwaysanotheradventure Was the Seiler interview with Marco Altini of HRV4Training? I think he also worked on the Oura ring.
@@3blindmiceAUS Yes - it's the FastTalk Podcast on 29th Feb - I'm pretty sure it was the 4 Gen Apple Watch too but could be wrong. My Apple Watch seems all over the place on HRV!
Could this be why 'threshold' testing may be more useful outside the lab environment because that metric can certainly change up or down depending on fitness level and helps you keep tabs on response to sickness or training. Personally I find it more useful and also safer. (As you stress though the same stretch of road and same or similar conditions). Also I do one test on road and another on my indoor trainer, because the results are slightly different.
@@Dvetox It's certainly more practical and less expensive to do VO2max in the field rather than in a lab! However, I've just done a lactate threshold test and found it fascinating - being pricked for blood every 4 mins to determine LT 1 and LT2. That cost £84 in Edinburgh, so not too expensive, but yet again one's true thresholds vary day-to-day and there are field tests which get pretty close. So the value is questionable.
I'm struggling to write a video that clearly explains this from the perspective of an older athlete. It keeps vanishing into graphs and lactate, fat and carb metabolism that make my eyes glaze over. Plus, different physiologists and coaches fail to agree a nomenclature for zones. Simple and clear it aint!
I don't understand the remark that it's not the absolute value of the VO2max matters but how much It changes.
Certainly someone with a high VO2max that increases just a little is better off than someone with a poor VO2max that substantially improves it but is still low.
Hi Noah - thanks for the comment. Here's my explanation of why knowing your exact VO2max doesn't really matter.
There's little you can actually 'do' with the knowledge of your VO2max. It's not like knowing your lactate thresholds, which you can use to train. So it's questionable whether it's worth spending money to have it precisely measured in a lab - the only way to actually measure your VO2max accurately.
I'd argue a VO2max estimate from your smartwatch or self-test (as opposed to true measurement) is valuable. Approximately correct is good enough, it doesn't have to be precise, provided you use the same method to estimate it over time. That way you can track changes and see improvement or decline.
As to the second point, someone with a low VO2max who increases it will make a MUCH bigger difference to their life than someone who increases the same amount from an already high level. It will dramatically cut their risk of dying early from a host of illnesses. Plus it's easier to increase VO2max when starting from a low base.
It's being widely used pre-operatively in hospitals now to increase survival and decrease recovery time from surgery, with most patients starting from low numbers. There's a ton of data on this if you care to look such as www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7202981/