The discovery of Endurance and heart rate data from Ultra runners!

He's just learned how to use a HRM and he wants to tell the World about this amazing breakthrough science.

arnarpeturs wrote:

Thank you Adrien for your input.

We just wanted to reach out to the running community here on letsrun and see the response. We have some very exciting results and are looking forward to sharing them with you in the near future. We already have runners sending us their data and it's matching great to our discoveries.

It is very interesting what happens during a long sustained effort at the same pace. When looking at the heart rate you will see a slight elevation of the heart rate that is called cardiovascular drift. Now we are able to predict that drift and extract health and fitness information.

Wow, that is amazing.

But we can predict accurately now and it's free.

We can even check the weather forecast by the hour.

This can help you avoid dehydration and cardiac drift on those hot and humid days.

Before the invention of the HRM, people just ran till they dropped, which might not be the best race strategy.

Makes sense. :(

To reach running immortality the winner of the Olympic Marathon should drop dead as they cross the finish line.

That's how you would know they timed the effort just right.

This has all of the hallmarks of both pseudoscience and a sales pitch. In none of arnarpeturs numerous posts does he provide any data, or numbers of any type. To say that you can "define endurance" at all is a known black hole, as the number of variables in human activity beyond ~1hour is far too high to have any reasonable standard.

For the first time in history it is now possible to accurately measure Endurance on a scale from 0-100% and predict race times over all distances based on heart rate data from a simple easy run. This is possible because of a recent patented breakthrough in human physiology.

The paragraph really really throws it. let me rephrase it: "For the low low price of $19.99 you too can learn your race times with nothing harder than an easy run!" What's the difference between an easy run, a recovery run, and an aerobic run? I know plenty of people who call runs at each level "easy".

Furthermore, you state that VO2max, lactate threshold, and fat burning ability are used to define endurance. I fundamentally disagree with that statement, as efficiency and caloric capacity are omitted, but that is beside the point. Your conclusion that heart rate is a catch all for these inputs alone is an easily disprovable statement. If I were to add an input such as caffeine, heat, dehydration, or fatigue, would my heart rate not be demonstrably different at a given pace, regardless of VO2max, lactate threshold or fat burn ability?

Lastly, your email domain of gmail.com and emoji usage suggest that the efforts are more sales and less scientific. Should you ever read scientific papers, they almost always remove pronoun identifiers. That is to say, you wouldn't read

"More information will be available soon but right now we are looking for heart rate data during extreme events to solidify our findings even further."

But instead would likely read:

"More information will be released, currently heart rate data during extreme events is being analyzed to solidify findings."

Dean Karnazas was determined by scientists to have a mutation that allowed him to recover even beyond his initial state. After an hour of running he was recovered 110%! After 2 hours, 120%!

Darby wrote:

arnarpeturs wrote:

The scientific definition of Endurance is the alignment of energy thresholds which can now for the first time be represented in the heart rate curve.

Please specify the source for this "scientific definition"?

That sounds a lot like pseudoscience to me. I cannot even understand what is "alignment of energy" thresholds. Are you talking about aerobic and anaerobic threshold? How can you call "alignment" of those endurance?

Darby wrote:

arnarpeturs wrote:

The scientific definition of Endurance is the alignment of energy thresholds which can now for the first time be represented in the heart rate curve.

Please specify the source for this "scientific definition"?

That sounds a lot like pseudoscience to me. I cannot even understand what is "alignment of energy" thresholds. Are you talking about aerobic and anaerobic threshold? How can you call "alignment" of those endurance?

Thank you Darby for your interest. All the science behind this discovery will be published in the coming months. We just wanted to reach out to the running community here to get in contact with some ultra runners. We are sure that there will be very lively discussions on this discovery in the near future.

Brofessor Prohardt wrote:

He's just learned how to use a HRM and he wants to tell the World about this amazing breakthrough science.

Love your name and love your content.

Don't worry the results will be published.

GnomeBe wrote:

But we can predict accurately now and it's free.

Right now there does not exist any method that can extract all the information we can based on a submaximal effort, while only looking at the heart rate response.

These information include:

Endurance on a scale from 0-100%

Maximum speed

Max heart rate

VO2max

Lactate threshold speed​​

Lactate threshold heart rate

Estimated race times over distances ranging from 100m to the marathon

Estimated recovery time after all types of activities

But the reason for this post is to get in contact with ultra runners that we are happy to analyze data from. But all discussion about Endurance is welcome.

Thank you for a thorough answer.

The point of this post is not to go into any detail of the science behind our discovery since we have not yet published our findings. But we enjoy all types of discussions about Endurance.

You can of course disagree on how to define Endurance since there is not yet a consensus on the definition. But factors such as VO2max, lactate and fat burning ability can predict race times pretty accurately, but only when they are all factored in together. Using only one parameter it is hard to predict over all distances.

We are measuring the heart rate response and heart rate curve and our research at the university level have shown that it did not matter for our analysis if a participant had ingested high amounts of caffeine before running. This would come as a surprise to many but the participants energy tanks are still the same, whether he ingests caffeine or not.

I hope you will keep following this topic and I am looking forward to publish more detailed information.

ViperDom wrote:

Run#1 - 30miles, 8:00m/m pace, 135bpm

Analysis results in an endurance score of 90%

Run#2 - 30miles, 8:00m/m pace, 145bpm

Analysis results in an endurance score of 80%

Both of these runs were in the same week

#1 was on a cool day using marthon"super" shoes

#2 was on a humid day using heavier trainers

So which is the actual state of endurance: 80% or 90% ?

Thank you for your input.

In both cases the individual would get his results based on what he could do in these conditions. In Run#1 we would be able to predict all race times done in similar conditions and the same with Run#2.

Also the average heart rate is not relevant but the whole heart rate curve, all the way from the start of the activity and we can also extract information from the recovery curve after the activity has stopped.

This post was intended to reach out to ultra runners but thank you for your question.

arnarpeturs my guess is that you are exploiting HRV data and it's variations, hence the chest strap requirement as opposed to wrist-based HR.

Polar has some analysis like this built into their watches and app but they do need some kind of maximal effort, and they use data over several days. I'd be curious how your method differs.

I personally don't run those distances so I cannot participate in your study.

bfef wrote:

arnarpeturs my guess is that you are exploiting HRV data and it's variations, hence the chest strap requirement as opposed to wrist-based HR.

Polar has some analysis like this built into their watches and app but they do need some kind of maximal effort, and they use data over several days. I'd be curious how your method differs.

I personally don't run those distances so I cannot participate in your study.

We use the initial heart rate response curve, the heart rate drift and the recovery curve to do our analysis.

The reason for using chest strap for now is that it's the most accurate. We have also performed analysis with wrist-based HRM and it works well, especially with Apple watches that have been shown to be the most accurate wrist-based HRM.

When receiving data like this that we do not control ourselves we prefer to have it from chest straps because of their accuracy. When we release our findings you will be able to get all your fitness parameters by using all different types of heart rate monitors.

Thank you for your interest.