UKC

Has anyone ever noticed a link between their testing heart rate and illness. I never did until my first Covid bout (before we knew Covid was here, so I was never sure until I had if again this week. Now I am sure).

One of the things that really struck me first time was that my heart rate over night was about 20 BPM higher than usual. That settled back to normal again after it had passed. Last week, I saw it that high again for a couple of nights before I tested positive. On the day of my positive test, most symptoms disappeared and my heart rate dropped by around 10 BPM, so still about 10 higher than normal. 

I woke up this morning and felt brilliant, looked at Garmin (I have always worn watches to bed. My husband thinks it's weird but have done it since childhood. Easier to know what time it is if you wake up in the night). My heart rate had dropped back to normal. Had a run and felt fine, did my test and line now very faint. I presume this is me over it. 

In the time between these two bouts of Covid, I haven't really been ill. I had never noticed it prior to Covid, but that of course doesn't mean it didn't happen. 

Anyone else find this happens with most illnesses or noticed it specifically as a Covid thing? 

Yes, heart rate is a predictor of an illness coming on.

As an amateur racing cyclist in my youth, at an early age I was taught to measure my resting pulse every morning. If my pulse was 10 beats above normal then it was generally a sign that I was coming down with a cold or something and I should rest not train. The increased heart rate would show up a day or two ahead of any noticeable cold symptoms.

I had a sinus infection and definitely noticed my HR was about 10-20 bpm higher when I went back to running after three weeks. I wasn't monitoring RHR but I bet it was higher. Think it's just your body working hard to fix itself.

Morning resting heart rate is a good marker of whether you are fit to run for this reason. If it is more than 10 beats faster than normal, either you are really quite stressed or poorly.

Just make sure you don't get fooled by being too hot overnight or in the morning especially at this time of year when the 'lighter' duvet is likely to be deployed very soon which could give you a false impression. The watch seems to rely on the early parts of the morning based on my experience. Even a few nights of lack of sleep pushes mine up into the 50s so it seems quite sensitive.

Yes, it's quite normal for many illnesses to increase heart rate, as the immune system reacts.

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-e&q=elevated+heart+rate+...

https://www.webmd.com/cold-and-flu/news/20200117/could-your-fitbit-help-det...

Is normal for your RHR to go up when you're ill - as your immune system ramps up you're doing more work while you rest.

There are other things that can raise your RHR, such as stress and overtraining, but keeping an eye on it is a good way of seeing when it would be a good idea to take things easy and when it's OK to push yourself.

I think it depends on the illness but for colds/flus etc its normal as the immune system kicks in. Especially if you have a fever.

There was a study done on fitbit data looking at whether it could predict flu outbreaks or not by measuring increases in heartrate. There was a definite correlation but only at a stage when it would have been picked up by traditional methods anyway.

Interesting comments! Thanks. Maybe I will monitor heart rate more often!

I am not prone to stress etc, so it would mostly suggest an illness. Having not really been ill for a couple of years, I haven't had many occasions to notice it. Lasts night's drop did make me think the test would be clear (or nearly) so interesting to see that it was very faint. 

I'm still testing +ve and my overnight RHR was 36... It was the dizzy heights of 44 last week... Its normally about 38-42

However, the Garmin is quite poor at recording the ACTUAL lowest HR, as I've seen 38 when the Garmin has listed the lowest HR at 41 or similar on numerous occasions. I tend to treat minor variations with a pinch of salt, but 10bpm is notable.

On another note, garmin pulseox is hopeless, as, I have found are the cheap amazon/ebay pulseox.

I have never seen a reading on the Garmin above 97% and generally it states 95% if I can even get a reading. 

I bought a fairly cheap pulseox - Braun - so not an unknown brand - and I can get variation of reading from 99% down to 93% depending if I use my ring finger or index finger and precise placement on the nail bed. I guess 2 little batteries are not really good enough to power them...

Not only useless, but the best way to burn through the battery. Medical one says 99-100 all the time on ear or finger, Garmin Fenix - random number generator!

If it's on a finger tip, they're not really designed with climbers in mind either. I had a medical a few years ago while I was spending a lot of time on the grit and the finger-tip oximeter the doc was using wouldn't even acknowledge I was alive.

In reply to thread:

Yep, +1 to the above. The increased RHR is often the first thing I notice of I have a cold coming on and my recent dose of covid pushed it up by about 10-15 BPM for a few days.

Totally normal to have an elevated heart rate for many infections, along with temperature etc. Simply put your body is just working a bit to fight off whatever the cause is and your heart rate increases to meet the demand. 

Wouldnae worry ;p

Home pulse oximeters are usually not calibrated regularly, regardless of quality. They're (I mean home probes AND the ones we carry on an ambulance) also notoriously unreliable with cold fingers, nail varnish, movement etc.

Been to a few patients recently now they're super popular that have seen the percentage in the mid-80s, freaked out and called for help. You can often tell what the problem is before you've even put the regularly calibrated ambulance probe on their finger ;p

I'm happy to be corrected by those more qualified than me but apart from actually having a respiratory condition (COPD for example) I'm not sure why anyone needs one at home. If an otherwise healthy person genuinely has low oxygen saturations it's often........a.......wee bit more than a call to NHS24 or the GP ;p

Increasing 999 call outs from the worried well:

”help! My sats are 74% and my pulse is 99!”

We turn up and point out they’re reading it the wrong way round. Sats 99%, pulse 74. Entirely normal.

I’ve had about 5 in the last 12 months🙄😂

Although I don't rely on the O2 saturation from a "home" oximeter (but I might be concerned if it only showed 80-something percent unless I felt fine), I presume the pulse rate is fairly accurate since that should be much easier to reliably measure.

Is that a valid presumption or is the pulse rate measurement on these similarly unreliable?

"Stress" in this case means all kind of things, not just mentally. Could be overtraining or (as discussed) illness. Some newer watches with use HRV to assess this and give you a metric.

You know, I'm not 94-98% sure on that... [heh heh]

Yes, I've noticed this too. My morning resting heart rate tends to be slightly higher for 2-3 days before I notice other symptoms of a cold. Somehow I've managed to avoid Covid, so I can't comment about that specifically.

I also notice monthly fluctuations in morning resting heart rate that correspond to particular points in my menstrual cycle. These are much more subtle, but they are consistent.

Joking aside I'm not sure. So many variables. Just go old school with a two fingers on a radial pulse and a watch and compare it. I'd imagine as long as it's consistently inaccurate that it's still useful information to you?

If you you're otherwise healthy then you're very unlikely to be feeling fine if it's accurately showing 80-something percent haha

TBH, They are not calibrated and, being honest, I cant recall a big calibration session going on with the work ones either.. There is no option to calibrate the home ones in the menu system. They are essentially a toy, that I was using to show my kids some science... But seemed to have at least some correlation to a hospital one if positioned appropriately, unlike the Garmin. 

They have become popular recently, as they are providing them by the NHS, but only for over 65s or with high risk. If you are under that you may still get ill, so people are buying them for themselves.

youtube.com/watch?v=nx27Ck7xOgo&

There is also the existence of 'happy hypoxia' https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphys.2021.745634/full that people may have heard of, and are concerned about enough to want to measure levels of SpO2 themselves at home...

However, it does show you need to know what you are on about when using any medical equipment...

Fair enough.

Total gimmick on a Garmin IMO. But I'm guessing basically noone buys whichever Garmin on the basis of having a pulse ox, they just happen to have one.

also....  elevated resting heart rate can indicate if you are overreaching your training and need to make your next session a recovery workout.

Aye. Body working harder to recover so heart rate increases. 

Dinnae need a Woop! tae tell me that ;p

Maybe I'm a eejit, because sometimes I do...

If I feel a bit too tired and considering making it an easy workout I can check my resting pulse and if it *isn't* elevated I can tell myself to stop being a wimp and get on with it. I personally find the correlation between how I feel and how I perform to be unreliable, so this can sometimes be a useful tool

Same here. The first time it was quite funny, but getting diverted from someone genuinely ill or injured to travel the best part of an hour to someone who can't read a gizmo they didn't even need to be using in the first place is becoming a complete waste of resources. There needs to be a new question added to the call-taker's algorithm along the lines of "So, ignore that thing you've put on your finger; how are you *actually feeling*?"

If you monitor you're pulse all the time, you'll soon learn to spot the peaks and troughs caused by training, being well recovered, sleep deprived, ill etc... whilst wrist devices aren't precise they are accurate enough to spot trends. 

Interesting, I hadn't really looked at it that way. So, my heart rate can be higher for a day or 2 after a hard session? But give it an easy/recovery workout and it will come down? Now you say that, I think I've seen this during my runs where my heart rate is higher than usual (I rarely check my RHR) following hard sessions or races.

Also, my HR seems higher than usual when doing races/events (yes, after factoring in the fact I am trying to run faster because it's a race!). Could this be down to anxiety/race nerves? I'd expect that would be the case before setting off, but it seems to be a bit higher than it has been in training whilst actually running as well.

Pre race it's hardly surprising, if your brain is like mine with say 5 mins until start time you'll be wondering if you're wearing too much, too little, should I dash to the toilet once more just in case... not to mention performance pressure.

On the few races I've ever done, I always used to find it amusing in the minutes before the off, how many times I'd adjust my laces because they might be too tight or loose.

Of course when running from home I'd just put the shoes on and go. Never seemed to work like that for a race.

Ah but if you've put your rarely worn favourite race socks on you'll be wondering if your feet might some how swell and they'll be too tight, but then too lose it's blister risk... the mind really does screw with you sometimes. 

Hahaha, yes, suddenly what I decided to wear thrown into question just minutes before the start!

I fully expect an impact pre race due to all of that but during? Possibly from sleeping badly the night before? Could I still be anxious whilst actually running?

The max HR you can reach increases when you are well rested, when your are tired you won’t be able to get your HR as high. During a race there’s all sorts going on psychologically and chemically in your brain that reduce RPE at max effort and allow you to push that big harder and often record   A higher HR max.

I've often had the sense that my heart is beating faster following illness, 'more feverishly', in a none medical termed way. I take it as a sign to go more gently till I feel normal again.

Your heart rate will be higher before and during a race because of nerves, excitement and it feeling more important than a typical training run. This is normal and if you are running to a particular heart rate then you should be aiming a bit higher in a race than in training. Don’t worry about this.

On a normal training day, however, an unusually elevated heart rate tells you your body is struggling to cope with the stresses being placed on it. The body doesn’t really differentiate between different types of stress, so this could indicate any combination of training too hard, illness, injury, lack of sleep, or psychological stress. It’s a definite warning sign that you are pushing yourself too hard in some way and that a crash of some kind is coming up if something doesn’t change. 

Great, thanks! But also, not great, in that I guess if my HR is generally higher for a given speed in a race, then my performance is limited by that. If I'm less stressed in training then I can go faster for a given HR.

Yes I've observed this most when ill (quite noticeable elevation on HR, 5+ BPM) and, to a lesser extent, when stressed about work or tired.

Perhaps more noticeable when I'm tired is I struggle to get near to my max HR which is something another poster mentioned.

So, if I could just taper enough I've got fresh legs but not too much that I lose fitness, but also avoid getting ill or stressed, sleep really well and somehow pretend to myself that I'm not really in a race, then I should get a PB 😉

Don’t worry yourself about a higher heart rate on race day, that’s not quite the same effect. You’ll find that although your HR is usually elevated on race day, you should also be able to sustain the higher HR for longer than usual so it cancels out.

On a normal, boring training day an elevated HR is a sign that your body is working overtime to recover and cope with dwindling resources. On race day it’s more like a sign that your body is excited, raring to go and ready to dig deep. 

Edit: As an aside, that’s why you shouldn’t use heart rate data from a race to set training zones (if you train to HR at all). You’ll end up setting everything too high. 

Thanks, yes that makes sense.

Funny enough, I feel a bit rough today and my run felt harder. It was a hilly trail run so difficult to tell if my HR was higher than usual but I suspect it was a bit.

Will have to do a covid test later I guess...had it in January so it's possible I've got it again!

I suffered from atrial fibrillation and had an ablation procedure 5 years ago which cured it. However,  sometimes when I have a viral infection I get short periods of AF. Cardiologist said that is normal. 

Maybe try not to get so worked up about racing? If race 'nerves' persist throughout the entire race, rather than just before the start, such that they add to the pressure on your heart, then I think something is wrong. You should be relaxing into the run, and not being stressed by thinking about the race; that doesn't sound healthy, or fun.

If you're at elite level, maybe some sports psychology. Otherwise, don't think about racing, just get out there and run for fun, with some other people. Why is the racing aspect so important to you that it actually degrades your performance?

I thought I was relaxing into it. I certainly don't feel anxious once the gun goes off. What the HR monitor says and what I feel are two different things it seems.

It's not racing per se. I'm often just doing events for fun or the challenge. I'm not aware it is degrading my performance, just hypothesising that if my HR is higher, it must be affecting my performance (which Stuart pointed out might be wrong).

Emotions like excitement and joy also raise your heart rate, not just nerves and stress! 

They’ve not said their performance is degraded (I don’t think), just that their HR is elevated on race days. That’s totally normal. Definitely nothing to worry about or pathologise unless there are other problems. 

If they are having the same emotional response on race day as they were on a training day then they might as well save themselves the entry fee. 

Apologies to thread for the hijack...

How often were you having AF "episodes" and how long did they last to make you go for the ablation?

I get AF but frequency and duration are not making me consider ablation at the moment.

Incidentally, I was told that runners are more likely to get AF than the general population.

'Excitement', 'nerves' and 'stress' are very closely related, physiologically.

https://www.google.com/search?q=excitement+physiology

I'm not sure about the effects of any of them on sports performance, good or bad; you'd have to speak to a sports psychologist on that, but I'm going to guess it depends on the individual. If these emotions cause an elevated heartrate that persists through activity (i.e. adds say 5bpm to normal hr at a given level of activity), then I can't see that it could be anything but detrimental, especially if you're hitting max hr. It suggests your cv system is working inefficiently, due to psychologically-induced physiological effects; muscular tension restricting blood flow, for instance: why we need to pee when nervous.

They are, yes. My point was that framing mountainbagger's psychophysiological response to racing as being necessarily negative and 'unhealthy' is too simplistic. First and foremost, I strongly disagree with the idea that a recreational runner who has a positive experience of racing should be trying to reduce pleasant emotional responses for the sake of performance. Especially since they have no apparent concerns about their performance!

I'm anticipating that you might read that and be thinking something like "ah, but they can change the physical response without changing the emotion". I'll pre-emptively answer that with a "not really" (and with an apology if I've guessed your reaction wrong). Conceptually we find it useful to separate the mental and physical aspects of emotions, but really that distinction is artificial. Emotions are a 'full-system' response and you can't change one aspect without affecting the rest.

I also disagree that their performance is necessarily taking a hit. If someone's resting heart rate is persistently elevated then that is a sign that something isn't right; they are quite likely run-down and unable to perform optimally. However, that isn't the same thing as a situation-specific arousal response before and during a race. 

Speaking as a psychologist (I mainly work in mental health services but I'm also qualified in sport psychology and have worked with premiership clubs), some level of increased psychophysiological arousal is typically necessary for peak performance. The precise relationship between arousal and performance does indeed differ across individuals and activities, but is basically always going to be an "inverted U" if you graph it. Too relaxed or too aroused and performance suffers, but moderately elevated arousal is beneficial for performance. This is because it isn't just your heart rate that changes in this state; blood flow is prioritised to large muscle groups rather than less task-critical processes like digestion, attention becomes more focused, breathing quickens to increase oxygen supply, the increased HR helps remove waste products from the blood and provide oxygen to muscles more quickly, hormonal changes allow you to 'dig deeper', etc etc. In lay terms we are talking about the "fight or flight" response; a full-system response that has essentially evolved to mobilise and focus all available bodily resources on the task in hand, which is potentially pretty useful if you are wanting a PB. Relax too much and the body will be in a state of "resting and digesting" where it is prioritising restorative and maintenance processes rather than action. Obviously, that arousal response increasingly interferes with performance as it gets more intense - we start to get shaky, panicky, blurry vision, hyperventilate and all sorts of other things. But that's not what I'm hearing from mountainbagger.

After all that, I'll slightly go back on myself and say that relaxation could well be useful for mountainbagger - I don't know enough about their situation to give a firm opinion either way. I'll often use relaxation strategies ahead of and during races or redpoint/onsight attempts if my arousal levels are starting to feel unhelpfully high. However, it's also important to be able to recognise if you are too relaxed and need to do something to "psych yourself up" or "get in the zone". There are too many factors involved for HR alone to be a good measure to use for this; it needs a more general attunement to one's body and to one's optimal levels of arousal, as well as an awareness of how these might differ across race and training contexts.

I stand by my advice to mountainbagger: if they are enjoying racing and their performance is unaffected, then they shouldn't worry at all that their HR is higher in a race than in training. This is entirely normal, hence why coaches advise against using race data to set HR zones for training. Mountainbagger would still do well to pay attention to what their body does on race day and how that correlates with performance, as it is definitely good to understand this and get a feel for it, but it should be done with the understanding that there will be differences between what they notice on race day compared to training days.

I was getting it several times a week and it was lasting an hour or so plus lots of little episodes in between. I was 50 when I had the ablation and very fit (mountain biker). I was very fortunate to be referred to an excellent cardiologist in Cardiff who was very pleased to have a fit and healthy patient with an excellent prognosis! I was also fortunate in receiving cryoablation which has a much better success rate than burning with lasers. Best choice I've made.

I simply misunderstood MB's comment about their elevated HR. I read it as it was affecting his performance. I thought I was also suggesting that recreational runners shouldn't be getting so worked up that their performance was affected; it was that I thought unhealthy. If MB finds no detrimental effect on their performance, then crack on.

Think I'd be considering ablation with that frequency, I can get maybe twice in a week, or nothing for 3 months, and duration could be 3 minutes or up to 3 hours.

Interestingly, I've found that I can sometimes stop it by taking my blood pressure, or pretending to take my blood pressure (!), or doing some silly breathing in and out (!!!) - only works sometimes but it's happened often enough to definitely not be coincidence.

Something to do with changing the intercostal (? - inside the chest) pressure which can cause changes in heart rhythm, and/or the tightening during taking blood pressure which does apparently cause some feedback effects. Most dramatically (in that I actually saw it), I had AF last week, got home, took my BP and literally watched the little flashing heart symbol go from fast flashing ~120bpm to steady ~60bpm in the middle of the pressure decreasing on my arm - quite spooky actually.

This?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valsalva_maneuver

Never heard of that but what I've been trying to do looks like it has some similarity. Didn't realise there was a defined "technique".

I was in two minds about commenting as I have a feeling I will be rapidly out of my depth given the expertise available on UKC. Plus this is another bag of spanners to having a slightly higher heart rate with Covid.

Basically look up "Vagal nerve stimulation" taking care how you type it....... 

Or just follow the links in the Wiki article...