Jump to content

Little hub study related to heart rates


Recommended Posts

Posted
Hi dudes and dudettes! I thought it might be an interesting exercise to do a little hub study related to heart rates. It probably won’t be very scientific, but perhaps we can learn something about us hubbers, statistics and analysis (and yes, I know it’s Friday!)

 

It would be great to get as many people’s data as possible to push up that sample size and make it better (or in special lingo - more statistically significant).

 

All that is required is that you have a relatively good handle on your maximum heart rate (and please, don’t use any formula, because we’ll actually test at the end if a formula makes sense!)

 

We need the following data and you have the following options to reply: reply to this thread, send me a dm, or complete this google sheet https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1G6picoJYkyTEgZkH72viLEx74aCuuYq5B6PBx_nH8Lc/edit?usp=sharing

 

1. name (hub name, real name, anonymous; it’s not important)

2. resting heart rate

3. maximum heart rate

4. age

5. star sign (fun factor to test whether there’s any correlation between star signs and max. hr)

6. sex (you have winky = male; you have a margaret = female; please no others :)

7. hub posts (another fun factor – we can test hypothesis whether higher posts equal higher max. hr :)

 

Thanks everyone! I’ll bump from time to time to get more samples. And in the end we’ll try to answer Austin in terms of what it all means!

 

  • Replies 160
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Posted

1 Pulse

2 22 bpm*

3 162 bpm*

4 41 yrs

5 Taurus

6 Male

7 450 odd

 

* Yes, I know its rediculously low, I am apparently still healthy and normal according to the cardiologist and electrocardiophysiologist

Posted

fanievb

56

203

32

M

Libra

I can buy from Rouxtjie

 

I'm sure that when the 1000+ post rule comes in to trade on the hub there will be a new post count market!

Posted

1 Pulse

2 22 bpm*

3 162 bpm*

4 41 yrs

5 Taurus

6 Male

7 450 odd

 

* Yes, I know its rediculously low, I am apparently still healthy and normal according to the cardiologist and electrocardiophysiologist

At least your avatar is still 'pulsing'!
Posted

Small sample of 11 thus far, but as an example, in the graph you can see the distribution of max. hr (actual) compared to max. hr from the 220-age calculation. Y-axis shows number of observations and x-axis the "buckets" of observations. I used the standard deviations in increments of 0.5 from the average. For example, 0.0 to 0.5 standard deviations* equal 182,5 to 188,6 max. hr.

 

*A standard deviation of -1 to +1 for a normal distribution should mean you cover 68% of all of the sample data, -2 to +2 should cover about 95% and -3 to +3 about 99%.

 

Actual average max. hr and standard deviation is 182,5 +- 12,1

 

Formula average max. hr and standard deviation is 179,2 +- 8,6

 

This already shows that (possibly) the max. hr deviates more in practice than with the theoretical formula of 220 - age (or in other words - don't be worried if yours is not close to the formula!) 

 

post-12446-0-44187400-1472225908_thumb.jpg

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Settings My Forum Content My Followed Content Forum Settings Ad Messages My Ads My Favourites My Saved Alerts My Pay Deals Help Logout