Low heartrate on Charge HR

[BenGT]

Hi all 🙂

Had some questions about the accuracy of the heart rate monitor on the new Charge HR.

Im overweight (102KG), BMI has me down as obese and although I am quite muscular I am on the most part fat. Now I am a rare breed of fat but fit, I run a lot and do a lot of kickboxing and cycling. Cardio for the most part happens for me 5/6 days a week its just i drink too much beer and eat too much rubbish.

Now I would expect my heartrate to be OK for my size but my resting heartrate is reported as 60BPM and it was as low as 54 when lying in bed last night. Currently typing this I'm 55BPM- surely this can't be right?

That puts me as an athlete and although quite fit for my size im certainly no athlete.

So, how accurate are people finding it?

Do we as a rule add on 10-15 BPM to make it more accurate?!

[CharleneMarie72]

I am very active and I run and bike as well.  My resting heartrate at night is in the 40s, sitting down, usually in the 50s.  Right now, as I am typing this (and I just sat from putting dishes away is displaying 56. I have taken my pulse and compared it to what it says and it seems to be quite accurate for me.

[_daniel_]

Ben - have you tried checking your pulse and comparing it to what the Charge HR says? 

[BenGT]

You know what? I hadnt thought of going old school and checking manually!

Seems quite accurate, maybe I'm just more dead than I thought

[Jackafunk]

Im pretty sure the lower the resting heartbeat, means that you have a healthier heart.

via;  http://www.webmd.com/heart-disease/features/5-heart-rate-myths-debunked?page=2

[josephz2va]

You can also use a Polar watch you can buy cheap at any store, at zero hour run the test for heart rate resting in bed.

If you're extremely active always pushing for the Maximal Cardio and eating right, lowering your fat percentage closer to 8% and reaching your weight requirement, your heart rate resting will drop gradually.

Lowest mine's been is 55 BPM, but some have a much lower rate. The official Guinness World Record for the lowest resting heart beat is 27bpm.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/476052/Exercise-mad-British-pensioner-found-to-have-world-s-slowest...

Trained athletes tend to have slow resting heart rates, and resting bradycardia in athletes should not be considered abnormal if the individual has no symptoms associated with it. For example Miguel Indurain, a Spanish cyclist and five time Tour de France winner, had a resting heart rate of 28 beats per minute,[citation needed]one of the lowest ever recorded in a healthy human. Martin Brady achieved the world record for the slowest heartbeat in a healthy human with a heart rate of just 27 bpm in 2005 (a record that still stands).[31]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heart_rate

[WolfRhan]

@BenGT  Just great - now I want to drink too much beer and eat too much rubbish.  Especially chips.  Chip butties.

[CoachKira]

I have found that my resting HR seems to be accurate with the Charge HR, but not the exercise HR. I work out vigorously doing Insanity and T25 type cardio workouts and with my chest strap I would often max out at 180 during one of these workouts. I would average 150-160 bpm during them. So far I've not gotten this Charge HR above 140 and it usually averages 110-120 during these high intensity workouts. This makes no sense, and I'm very disappointed, because I had hoped not to have to wear my other HRM for every workout once I upgraded to the Charge HR. I have readjusted, tightened, and done all the steps they say to do to make it more accurate and still I know I'm coming in way too low.

[skiskool]

I agree.  The HR that is recorded during exercise is almost useless - and this was the only reason I bought the Charge HR, so I can provide my Heath insurer with data about my exercise regime.  Like the previous poster, there's nothing I can do to adjust it that will provide me with an accurate reading.  Just this morning, I did 50 burpees and 50 press ups as part of a circuit and at times it was showing 150bpm, then a couple of minutes later just 70bpm, then nothing!!  That's how it has been for the last 2 weeks. 

I did a cycle commute last week with a Garmin Edge and chest strap, while also having the Charge HR on for comparison and although the Garmin showed an average HR of 143bpm. The Charge HR barely even reached 140, let alone recorded that as an average - it was mostly below 100bpm.

I'll give it a few more weeks to bed in and for me to try to find the optimal placement before I give up and get something chest strappy instead.  Consigning the Charge HR to a dark cupboard and not recommending it to anyone.

[ncolbath]

Having the same issue...

Wore both my polar with chest strap and Charge HR to the gym last night to compare and in the middle of a set of heavy squats I checked both to compare... Polar had me at 170bpm, and charge went from 118 to --. Throughout the rest of my workout, i continued to check them both and the 118 was the highest the charge ever went, and i know my heart rate was well above that and right on with the Polar. 

Really dissapointed in this.  I was really hoping to slim down on the amount of devices i had to wear at the gym, shouldnt have spent the extra money and just bought the $99 one to track steps.

[peterborocanuck]

Mine is very accurate at the low end but undercounts when I'm working hard.  Your heart rate sounds perfectly OK.  I'd just feel good about it if I were you.

[AdamPow]

Mine is very accurate up to about 130 bpm and then it diverges to the low side from other HR measuring devices. I've found the resting heart rate to be very accurate. 

[Heybales]

---

@ncolbath wrote:

Having the same issue...

Wore both my polar with chest strap and Charge HR to the gym last night to compare and in the middle of a set of heavy squats I checked both to compare... Polar had me at 170bpm, and charge went from 118 to --. Throughout the rest of my workout, i continued to check them both and the 118 was the highest the charge ever went, and i know my heart rate was well above that and right on with the Polar. 

Really dissapointed in this.  I was really hoping to slim down on the amount of devices i had to wear at the gym, shouldnt have spent the extra money and just bought the $99 one to track steps.

---

If the desire was for more accurate calorie count while lifting - forget it.

Not a valid use of the HR formula that is being used.

The ONLY correlation between HR and calorie burn is for steady-state aerobic exercise, same HR for 2-4 min.

Your lifting should be totally opposite of that if done correctly - anaerobic and HR all over the place.

As example of why - next time you lift wear your Polar.

While standing there before your first set - note your HR. That's the HR that is needed to supply the oxygen to burn the fuel required for just standing there.

Now do your set, note at end how high it got. And not because of needing oxygen for fuel burning either.

Now just stand there exactly the same way. How long until HR comes down to same level required for actually standing there?

Does it ever, or are you willing to wait that long?

That whole time it's dropping, it's inflated HR for the actual needs of the calories being burned.

So really doesn't matter if Charge HR lost it, unless just curious if your muscles are tired or not and can push the HR as high as normal. Then again, being able to do the reps with same weight tells the same story.

Just wanted to help you with that feeling you must wear these devices to the gym.

Start your activity record on the device - then manually log it as Weights using the same start and duration time, let the database give the calorie burn - that's more accurate than HR based.

[Spartan_Dawg]

Same here.

If I do HIIT sprints, I can usually get a high 170s or even 180 read, but only for the first or second sprint.  Otherwise, it tops out around 150-160, or just goes to the always fun "--" despite my HR being in the 160s - 170s.

Regarding the OP's question, my resting HR is about 45, although I have always been active and in shape.  I think the Charge HR is very accurate outside of the workout-level reads, and unless you're having other symptoms, I would take the low resting HR as a good sign of a healthy heart.  Still, can't hurt to cut back on the rubbish 🙂

[pprince]

Hi, I am in cardiac rehab.  My fitbit has been registering some low heart rates.  Today I did a comparison between my fitbit rate and the hospitals pulse reader.  My fitbit had me 20+ lower on my rate, at one point I had no pulse.  Anyone else with this problem?  Last week after the tread mill I registered 59 abd then after biking I was 57, we know these were wrong.  Today my heart rate was 100+ for the whole workout.  

I got the fitbit to use in the cardiac rehab, no I am not sure it is working correctly and I need the true rate.

Thanks!

[pprince]

Hi, I am in cardiac rehab.  My fitbit has been registering some low heart rates.  Today I did a comparison between my fitbit rate and the hospitals pulse reader.  My fitbit had me 20+ lower on my rate, at one point I had no pulse.  Anyone else with this problem?  Last week after the tread mill I registered 59 abd then after biking I was 57, we know these were wrong.  Today my heart rate was 100+ for the whole workout.  

I got the fitbit to use in the cardiac rehab, now I am not sure it is working correctly and I need the true rate.

Thanks!

[USAF-Larry]

---

@pprince wrote:

Hi, I am in cardiac rehab.  My fitbit has been registering some low heart rates.  Today I did a comparison between my fitbit rate and the hospitals pulse reader.  My fitbit had me 20+ lower on my rate, at one point I had no pulse.  Anyone else with this problem?  Last week after the tread mill I registered 59 abd then after biking I was 57, we know these were wrong.  Today my heart rate was 100+ for the whole workout.  

I got the fitbit to use in the cardiac rehab, now I am not sure it is working correctly and I need the true rate.

Thanks!

---

The FitBit is not a medical device, and cannot be used to accurately read hear rate for cardiac rehab.  The accuracy of the heart rate reading, though is dependent upon where it is placed on the arm. When I am working out, I push the Charge HR up on the arm at least 3 finger widths from the wrist bone, and it gets reasonable accurate readings. If is slides down the arm, or is too loose, it will not measure any heart rate or will be a low reading.

[Marcy]

A resting heart rate of 60-100 bpm is considered normal. One study indicated being on the low end was better for longetivity. So that's good news for you. Anyone with a 60 rhr, would likely have a heart rate in the 50's at times, especially when sleeping when the heart rate is at its lowest.  Watch yourself for any slow heart rate symptoms such as light headedness or fatigue. Also, watch that your heart rate is responsive to your level of activity.  Lots of people have rhr lower than yours who are healthy and aren't super athletes.