If you believe you have super-high VO2max because a watch tells you so, then fantastic. Please remember that your Garmin / Apple / Polar VO2max produces an algorithmic estimate based on your activity profile. Some UA-cam videos compare these estimates with lab measured tests and find they're close, which is great for that individual with that activity profile. But it's not transferable to everyone, as all of us have different activity profiles. It's confirmed by te research paper linked in the video description. There's a significant difference shown in the video between my Garmin and Apple estimates and the lab measured test (the result of which I deliberately haven't given).
Agreed. I took a holiday in France, and did 1000km cycling in the alps - Garmin thought my VO2 went from my normal 51 to 59 in 2 weeks. Im 52, and this would be impossible to get to 95th percentile in just 2 weeks. Just use it (smartwatch etc) for trend analysis, not accurate numbers. Get a lab result, and compare to your smartwatch from then on.
I’ve been wearing a Garmin Venu 2 for the passed two years and also done two lab fitness tests. The VO2 max on my Garmin is exactly the same as the lab testing. 👍😊
Hello Simon, I watched the interview with the climber/cardiologist and found it very useful. I'm 73 year old cyclist, sea kayaker and ex hockey player who still skates and loves the ice. I've recently gone through a series of exams with my cardiologist and then with an electrocardiologist. I'm in good shape, not to worry, but one fact was revealed that I hadn't anticipated, as we age we do need to taper some and not approach workouts with the intensity we might have twenty years earlier. I shared that video with my close cycling/skating friends and will share the Older Athlete series too. Thanks for all the good work you do, Simon.
Hmmm … as the eighth decade has about 16 months to go and the ninth approaches, this video - and the series - provides a very helpful, information-packed and encouragement-laden context to my activities. Overall, staying physically active gives me a high level of gratitude for well, everything! And although some group activities have their downsides, overall, it’s being physically active in a social and supportive group setting that has the biggest impact on mental well-being. I hope you’ll cover this aspect in your Older Athlete Series. Thank you Simon.
Thank you for these videos! Most youtube cycling content is aimed at the younger riders and those of us 50+ don't always get the attention we deserve. Funny, since we're the ones able to spend the most money on bikes! Anyway, thanks again and please continue these types of videos along with your other excellent content. You've also piqued my interest in cycling in Scotland the next time I fly over from the states. Me and the wife seem to spend most of our cycling holidays in Switzerland or Austria so we need to change it up a bit.
I’ve been watching different videos on declining and fitness as we age. I like what you said about the fitness app may not be accurate but as long as it’s consistent. I think it depends on your gps in the watch. I think as we age we may decline a bit but life is still great as long as we keep active and eat well, rest well. The way the body grows new cells as we age is incredible.
Such a brilliant UA-cam channel. I’m applying to join the fire service at 57 years old - Vo2 max is haunting my dreams at the moment as I have a gas analysis test coming in July. I think I’m around 42.5 which is what I need to achieve for the test, but your videos are so informative and evidence based. Many thanks.
Agree about comparing yourself to yourself. After I read the book book 'Sports Gene', I realized the competition is with oneself. I've been cycling and working out consistently and with some intensity for 25+ years. In my mid fifties and I feel like I can do most, if not all, of what I could do in my 30s and 40s.
That's really interesting, Simon. Just checked what my Garmin estimates mine as. Age 62 in July, current score is 44. That's off cycling 50 miles per week average in 2023 and 75 per week so far in 2024. Please keep making your excellent films, sending you a big thank you.
Arguably the best, wisest content on this topic. Bravo! The saddest thing we see among our 60+ age peers is that old, vicious circle: the less energy they feel, the less active they become. A death trap. 😣
Thanks Simon for an informative video. I wear a Fitbit to track my progress, but have not done a VO2 max test. My approach to fitness is sustainability. Walking/hiking. Swimming, biking and strength training. In it for the long haul.
Thank you for sharing insights on Vo2max and its relevance to health span. Understanding Vo2max, the maximum rate of oxygen consumption during exercise, is crucial as it directly correlates with cardiovascular fitness and overall health. Elevated Vo2max levels indicate better heart and lung function, which are essential for maintaining optimal health span and reducing the risk of chronic diseases. Your explanation underscores the importance of monitoring Vo2max for promoting longevity and well-being.
Great Video and great series, getting a lot from them. As a 50 year i had spent the last few years getting myself ready fitness wise for older age : lost weight / eat sensible / took up triathlon as a sport. Then an unexpected heart issue before Christmas requiring open heart surgery has set me back, but I will come back from this over the next few years.
Yesterday I (male age 63) underwent a VO2max lab test. The result is 51.3 ml/min/kg. At 15% decline per decade it won’t be before age 120 that my VO2max would drop below 20. Now I need to continue exercising (which I do 1.5 hrs a day)😅
I have a very high VO2max for my age in part due to the fact, with rare exception, I’ve been training hard 6 days a week for years. Recently my Garmin reported a 1 point decline although my training hasn’t changed. I’m guessing the decline is due to advancing age. But also I naturally gravitate to long zone 2 or 3 activities, long rides, swims, and runs at moderate pace. My coaches all encourage me to do high intensity intervals at least one training session per week but because that level of effort is especially painful for an old man I’ve been avoiding them, and that’s got to stop starting tomorrow. Thanks for the great motivational video Simon, keep them coming.
This is interesting but I was shocked by the 15% decline every 10 years 😳My vo2 max was measured in a lab when I was in my 30s and a competitive runner training around 90 miles/ week.Both my husband and my numbers were 75 for him and 70 for me. He was an elite age group athlete and 20 years older than me. My most recent accurate measurement is 58 and recently on Garmin similar and I’m now 68. I can’t run as much (knees) now but train and race on the bike doing 2-3 hard interval workouts/ week, weights 2x week,3x in winter.Jump rope and short runs 3-4 / week. The main difference from when I was younger is I have to rest more after these sessions to recover enough to maintain the training. I also have an easy week every 4th week or if I’m tired. I notice the test you did is on a treadmill. Would that not favour someone who’s a runner? Some cyclists are useless runners so would that not give a lower reading due to them not being running fit? Sorry, long.
We're heading into specialist territory here, so I won't contribute BS. I had all this video checked by a true expert. One point I'd make re-Garmins is that we don't know the change the way they do is very tricky.
@@alwaysanotheradventure Ha Ha, not sure where I am on the BS scale but I will admit I feel like an imposter sometimes. My story is true, I’m 74 yo and my Garmin measured VO2max is 44 (recently down from 45). Garmin tells me my fitness age is 21 (recently up from 20) so there is a 53 year delta from my chronological age to my fitness age and I’m pretty proud of that. I think it means my current level of fitness would be about average for a 21 yo. I regularly compete in halfs, marathons, and short course triathlons. In local events I can usually get on the podium, in national events I usually finish towards the middle of my age group. I’m by no means an elite athlete and at major events there are always phenomenal athletes that dominate the age group. Am I just fighting off the physical decline that accompanies old age, or taking one last go at being a competitive endurance athlete, I’m not sure it matters because I relish the good health that comes with intense training. This morning instead of my usual slow 2-4K swim, I did 5 x 300m tempo sets and it felt totally right. My goals as an athlete may be unrealistic for a 74 yo but I don’t care because I’m not ready to accept the alternative. Thanks for the motivation and keep up the great work.
@@doernerrr I'm not for a second going to suggest anything like 'slow down a bit' but I am going to caution you about introducing higher intensity work very cautiously. You've been around athletics longer than I have been alive so I'm sure you've seen plenty of athletes get injured when they changed what they were doing too fast, too soon. If you do add intensity then also take out some volume to compensate. But by the sounds of things you are doing a phenomenal job already so you might want to consider 'if it ain't, broke don't fix it'.
I am 71 years of age with few stents in my heart. Would it surprise you if I tell you that my fitbit (sense) estimated my cardiologist fitness (vo2 max) at 56-69? I am sure that I am nowhere near as fit as you are. However, one thing I am very surprise to see is that you are jogging in some of your videos because when I jog like this, my hr reaches 150 very easily. Like you, I have been told not to exercise beyond hrs 135. That being the case, I find hiit is really a Jo,e for me. Thanks for the wonderful video series
I trained hard and regularly in younger years and stopped around age 28 (now close to 48) - my weight went up to 18.2 stone and in Jan this year I stopped drinking alcohol (was a nightly drinker for years), and re-joined the gym. I could only do 25 min jog on treadmill low intensity with breaks to yesterday 60 mins with no breaks. I treated myself to a Garmin Fenix 7 Pro Solar and according to it's reports I'm well into the 50 segment of the VO2 Max graphic - Excellent and that I'm in top 10% for men aged 40-49. Not sure that says much for my age group :) As of this morning I am 16 stone 4lbs....no idea what my target should/will be, but I have a muscular frame and am 6'1, so thinking 14 to 14.5 stone.....
There’s huge variation in accuracy from the Garmin estimates - not measurements - between individuals and they don’t share their algorithms. It’s not worth comparing against a measured norm reference standards, just against yourself over time.
Same comment as others; my garmin Venu vO2 max is the same number (42 last year at age 64, and one other stress test a few years earlier). It tracks with how I feel, I feel pretty fit when I am at 42 or above, less so when it dips down to 40. I’ve also noticed that the number goes down even tho my training doesn’t change. My hard sessions are mostly on the bike (trainer or road) where my FTP is around 220. I also pay attention to HR elasticity, ie how fast the HR goes up in response to an effort and then how fast it recovers when the load is reduced. This last measure also is a really good surrogate for how fit I feel.
Turning 60 and I trail run 100km a week and cycle 10-12,000km a year plus alpine climbing and ski mountaineering. I keep myself lean and fit and while I love some post-run cookies, I also try to eat pretty healthy. I can't tell you my VO2 max, but I know I can still run a
Thanks a lot for these videos, Simon. They’re really helpful and superbly produced. So glad I came across them a couple of weeks ago, and recognised you from north east TV, as a Teessider by birth! I’m your age exactly, pretty fit and active, but you are inspiring me to greater levels of activity and fitness! 😊
Hi Mark - Look North feels like a different lifetime. Hope you start a little more activity - doing some is the biggest improvement you can make to your overall well being. You’ve give me the idea for another video 😁
Good video - thanks for posting. I would say modern smart watches are actually pretty good as Vo2Max. I (a 56yo male) had mine tasted in a lab at 57 for running and 52 for cycling. My Garmin 955 estimated 54 and 55 respectively so under 10% off.
The watch measures it, and the graphics show up on the phone app for Garmin (under Performance Statistics) and for the Apple Watch. I’m not sure about the Polar or Wahoo. Zwift has its own version as does Wahoo Systm.
I’m tempted to have a proper test. I do see an upward trend in my Garmin estimate. Over the couple of years it’s gone from high 30s to 51, and that seems to reflect the more structured work that I do on the bike. And more climbing. I’m 67 now, and hope to maintain and if I can, build more fitness. I got back into serious cycling about four years ago, after a long break. And feel so much better for it. As you say, a wearable helps show we are moving in the right direction.
I had my vo2 max tested three years ago when I was 69. My score was an excellent 53. At 72 my Fitbit says my fitness score is an excellent 50-54. 90% of my training is in zone two. My Concept 2 rower, total gym, and walking the hills in my neighborhood keeps me in shape. I workout six days a week.
I feel the virus pain! I was sick over the summer and went from 57 to 49 over 3 months of not being able to train. Good news was that rebound gains are a thing but it took 3 months to get it back (I’m 40). Now I’ve been hit with another illness. I feel with sarcopenia you get a stair step decline when you are ill or injured. Becomes even more important to look after your immune system which intense vo2max style training actually blunts
@@alwaysanotheradventureBrutal - I find I have to remind myself that I can do the activity in and of itself rather than be concerned about my previous pace/power.
So, there's still hope for me then. Just. But my 10 year plans are now 5 years long. Makes sense to me. Thanks for the stimulating videos in this series.
At 53 , I've used the max hr rest hr and bodyweight vo2 max formulas and I seem to be around vo2 max of 40 . My second hand xmas present garmin watch has my v02 max at 46 as the previous owner took at for a jog to test before selling , his rest hr was 50 😅. Apparently Alaskan Huskies have a V02 max of 200. I reckon your hiking dog buddy at least a 100 💪 😅
I thought I had a reasonably good VO2max until this video. I changed from a fitbit Iconic to an Apple watch 8 after Fitbit put out a recall on the Iconic. The Iconic had me around 43-45 VO2max the Apple has me around 35.8 and 36 and even as high as 37.4 in October but only extrapolates those values when I do walks. It does not look at efforts when MTB riding which is disappointing as the Fitbit did and the MTB rides are vastly higher intensity and over a much greater time domain.
For some people the estimates match the lab tests, in others they don't. You can link Strava or Training Peaks (free) accounts to Apple so hopefully the MTB efforts are counted with the other Apple data.
When I started running back in 2021 at age 56 I had a VO2Max from an Apple Watch of 33. That went up to 40 within a year. Since March 2022 I am using a Garmin Epix and there I started with 41 and now I am stable at 48 for more than half a year. Ha, in 1 month I will reach Excellent just by hitting 60. That said in the past year I did not pay much attention to it (my watch does) as I am mostly working on Lactate Threshold and Endurance for Hal and Full Marathons.
Been a serious cyclist for 40 years, plus gym, kayaking and hiking. I just turned 69 four months after breaking my ankle in 3 places. Starting to ride my road bike again and I'm amazed at how much fitness I've lost. Will I ever get it back and what's the best way to go about getting it back?
Amazing content! You are a fantastic role model for all athletes. I have been training for 200k cycling gravel events, and completed one 2 weeks back and doing unbound in a week, feel fantastic… the catch which is disappointing is that my VO2max has dropped 15 points since the start of my training…. 😢 why do you think that is? Issues with garmin?
I honestly don’t know - if you feel you’re improving, and have perhaps set benchmarks (time or av watts up specific hill) then that’s what counts. Garmin doesn’t share details of how it works out VO2max. Oh and the BEST of good fortune for your event.
There is so much to consider beyond the simple number of your VO2Max score and you've made a good job at covering some of them, Simon. You are absolutely right that the number is less important than the trend. But I want to add this for added context: as we age from age 35 onwards we tend to lose aerobic fitness (VO2Max) and strength (bone and muscle mass) at roughly the same rate. We also tend to gain weight (fat) in the same timeframe. Because VO2Max is a measurement of oxygen in relation to body weight one of the reasons for the decline in VO2Max is simply weight gain rather than any loss of capability in our cardiovascular systems (assuming no change in exercise habits) and that is also one of the underlying reasons that VO2Max and health span are intrinsically linked (obesity and poor health go hand in hand). So if we want an easy hack to improve our VO2Max then we could lose a few of the extra pounds that we tend to accumulate with advancing years (easier said than done). But consider that if you are doing what your doctor (should) order and doing enough weight training to increase bone and muscle mass you will be gaining weight and apparently making your VO2Max worse while doing a lot to improve your overall wellbeing... VO2Max does not tell anywhere near the whole story when it comes to health span (or even for predicting athletic performance) but it is relatively easy to measure and is therefore given plenty of attention. I want to be a voice of caution here. There is a current vogue amongst the health and fitness professionals to look at VO2Max as the Most Important Thing when it comes to longevity. It is important and, as you point out, if it drops below a certain level you become a non-functioning human being. But generally speaking, people with a VO2Max below 20 are those with serious health problems like heart failure and those of us who keep even moderately active by walking regularly will avoid declining to that level. Most of the audience of this channel are already considerably more active than this in a cardiovascular fitness sense, though I have my doubts if most are as a strong as they could be or as focussed on that aspect of fitness as they should be. Loss of muscular strength will lead to the inability to do cardiovascular exercise far more rapidly than declining VO2Max will. A short illness like the one you have just experienced can be bounced back from in 6 weeks if you have the underlying muscular strength to allow you to exercise again. All too often older people do not and therefore a short illness can be the start of terminal decline.
I don't think u can out exercise a bad diet over the years, especially saturated fat stuff. I looked at that as I have about 8kg I can definitely lose. As a rough guide using a vo2 calculator, seem around 3kg plus minus 500g to gain 1 vo2 max score
You are 100% correct regarding the role of body mass in relative VO2max estimates - as you say, an overweight individual can improve their VO2max (in mL/kg/min) by simply losing weight [Of course, the same does not apply to absolute VO2max, expressed as L/min]. However, videos like this one can only cover so much before it gets (a) too long, and (b) too bogged down in scientific detail that can confuse the central message. By their nature, they need to focus on one (or two) things at a time and in doing so, are more effective at helping a larger audience. In terms of simple messages, the best is probably something like "Stay active, maintain a healthy weight, and eat healthy food" Even within each of those three components, simple messages help a wider audience. More complicated, specific, scientifically accurate messages are often not translatable for most of the general public.
@@davidrowe8747 You make very good points, David, but the main one I respectfully, but fundamentally, disagree with: simple messages don't deliver and the general public are capable of absorbing a lot more nuance than the health & fitness - and especially the medical - world appear to think. Roughly half of all people don't exercise enough and most would be served well by 'just move more' and are well aware of that message but it is clearly not working. The other half do move more but (for various reasons) want to do even more and go looking for additional information. The followers of this channel fall into that camp and I include myself in their number (though my day job is in exercise science and I have worked in the health system too so have some additional understanding that most people will lack). But when we start looking for information where do we go and what sources do we trust? 'Ah! Dr. So and so must know what he is talking about, surely?'. Not necessarily because there is a very good chance that any doctor or sports scientist who is talking in the public sphere about health and longevity is heavily influenced by performance based sports science not exercise science or metabolic health (and all the metabolic health specialists I follow appear to have glaring gaps in their knowledge about exercise science too). (One of the world's pre-eminent sports scientists - and medical doctor - only came to realise the importance of metabolic health and strength training after he had retired from academic life yet the scientific evidence in support of both have been around for a long, long time...) There are essentially two camps of available information: the overly simplified ("just move more") and the overly complicated. The fitness world likes to complicate things because it keeps it interesting for the trainer and client alike but while a tiny proportion of people actually engage the services of a trainer the influence of the fitness industry (and it is an industry aimed at profit generation above all else) is widespread and most of us have absorbed its messages, good or bad. The medical advice available from most doctors & physios generally falls into the overly simplified camp because, quite frankly, while the medical system is pretty good at fixing broken people it is not very good at stopping people degenerate into ill health in the first place. Medical practitioners are not taught a whole lot about exercise science, though some will have delved into sports science (the two are not the same though are closely related) and the academic study into longevity, health and exercise is pretty ill-informed at the moment anyway. At the other end of the spectrum are the sports scientists and performance coaches who are looking to maximise performance in elite athletes. But the experiences of elite athletes is a world apart from 95% (plus) of the rest of human species and the things they do to make the tiny incremental gains that allow them to win medals is not the same as what they did to get in contention in the first place. For example, there is a lot being made about Zone Training at the moment (80% at Z2, 20% in Z5) and pointing out that this is what the top runners and cyclists do. As a sports scientist interested in performance I find that fascinating. As an exercise scientist interested in increasing health span I need to realise that 20% of an elite marathon runner's training is approximately 2-2.5 hours at Zone 5 every week! As a recreational runner who might run for 2-3 hours a week I wonder how relevant that is to me... My purpose of commenting below Simon's excellent videos is two fold: I hope to point him in the direction of other areas of learning and maybe inspire another video or two for us all to benefit from. But I also want the viewers to remain sceptical enough to keep looking further. I spent 20 years as a (low performing) endurance athlete before I was forced to learn that strength training and metabolic health were enormously important to my health (and completely under appreciated in the endurance sport world and in academic sports science in general). I am now an even better endurance athlete (still low performing and a cyclist rather than a runner) at age 49 thanks to 10 years of strength training and sorting out what I was eating. And because I am trained in health science (and continually update my knowledge) I know the evidence is there to support my n=1 experiences but that evidence is not currently well known or well circulated by fitness influencers on social media at the moment.
I've been laid low with a chesty virus thing for 8 weeks now, hardly exercising so I will be gauging my efforts as I slowly start getting active again. I purchased a new garmin vívoactive 5 and it seems to take a while for it guage my numbers so my vO2max hasn't changed from my old garmin. I doubt I will ever do a lab test so just intend to use its reading as a guide of my fitness. It does report my stress levels as a lot higher since the new watch arrived though!
I got the Vo2Max lab test at age of 45 and I got the figure for around 52.5 and now I am 62 and my Garmin 965 Smart watch give me the figure of 48 and I double check with my current 5K finish time and I think my current VO2Max around 41 to 43 around. But My Garmin watch just indicate me that my VO2Max is improving for the past 24 month.
Hey Alfred. -Garmin keeps its algorithm secret but on its website it refers to VO2max as an estimate. So you’re right not to compare it to your lab measured number. However, the change over time should be correct. There are other self-estimate ways to get your VO2max and I’ll do a video on those soon.
I am determined that as I approach 60 and beyond that my children and family members will NEVER have any say on putting me in some nursing home or taking care of me because I did not take the best care of myself. They lie a lot.
I am continuing my fitness routine at 77 & will like to get a 50 VO2 . Had a 69 on treadmill at 44 . Agree with your thoughts & looking forward to future videos .Greetings from Sydney.
Im in my 50s mixing up triathlon training with hyrox training, looking forward to retirement to make it easier to schedule training. I know my VO2 but its more a curiosity to me: my metric is whether I can still compete in events and races
15% is a big number to overcome. I won’t be doing a VO2Max test. Avoiding becoming frail is a key, a bout of pneumonia will do it. Maintaining all you can for as long as a you can is very key. My 80 yr old mum is a top 3% Strava active user. She doesn’t do marathons but she does a decent walk and sometimes a bike ride just about every day. You can’t outrun or outlive a Crap diet. Your diet is you. I suspect this story needs to be seen by the sedate majority.
I was thinking about a video ‘show this to your friends’. Separately - great podcast for you Adventure Audio Podcast from Calgary. The one with 4iii in the subject heading. Host talks about his set up for biking in -44c 🥶. I thought about you and your ride.
@@alwaysanotheradventure healthy living - converting the whole country is a lost cause, just look at the profits of Greggs, Burger King, McDonalds. It’s a time bomb of very bad health indeed. Excessively overweight is near the norm now. My cousin did have a bariatric ambulance service operating for some years. His small fleet of double size ambulances was always on the road. Specialist lifting kit for people unable to move under their own steam was £100k each item I think. These are extreme obese people you don’t see as they never leave home.
It shows up in the Apple Health app, and I THINK that can draw data from Strava, T.Peaks etc. regardless of wearables. I only really noticed it and started using the Health App after I bought an Apple Watch.
I am 78 years old. Since retiring, I have taken a couple of bad falls that have left me with an artificial hip, some spinal damage, and a significant limp. I am no longer able to run. My limp impedes my ability to do a normal one mile walk test. (I can walk a few miles, but I'm very slow and it's painful.) I also have a cardiac pacemaker (for bradycardia) and take a variety of medicines (low dose propanol) that may interfere with normal heart functions. I do cycle regularly on a recumbent tadpole trike with an electric assist. I normally ride for about 2 hours at 11.5 mph. I use a chest strap heart monitor in conjunction with my Apple Watch (5). I track all my walks and rides with Strava, which is linked to my Apple Watch. That setup seems to give me good data. I have tracked my data since 2020. Since I can't run and have difficulty walking, doing one of the normal VO2 Max tests is not an option. My Apple Watch does not automatically calculate a VO2 Max from my walks. Will it work if I use my resting heart rate from the Apple Watch in conjunction with the Max Heart Rate from my rides to estimate my VO2 Max? The formula I found is VO2 Max = (Max HR/Resting HR*15.3) Thanks in advance for your answer. Dave Althaus
I'd love to help Dave but I'm not an expert. I go to the people who really know their stuff then put it into videos in an understandable way. You're going to need to ask a real expert, sorry.
@@alwaysanotheradventure - Thanks. I work with a couple of Electrophysiologist at Duke Medical. I’ll see if they can talk to the subject. If I learn anything, I will share it. Please keep up the good work. Your videos are ver helpful to me.
Most research that I am aware of shows mild (single digit) increase in VO2 max over weeks but I do not recall longer term multi year studies that show major changes (>20). Always thought our mother given mitrochondrial talent played key role until I learned that Olympian high jumpers lived longer than olympic endurance athletes. My assumption now is that “Mind matters” and high jumpers have the best life tools since there competition teaches them how to deal with failure.
Great series thanks for creating. BTW, An American physician Peter Attia has good guidance for healthspan. Hes a qualified thoracic surgeon not a crank.
My Apple watch says 32.1 my stress test shows 11.1 METS which is x 3.5 = 39.55 VO2 Max. Doing it in a lab these days is not really necessary. Agree it is more important to see changes on your device which probably consistent at least. 7 months ago I had open heart surgery for valves not coronary. I will be 80 this year! I am up 11% since before surgery. I think another 6 months of training I will get it higher. 10 minutes on Bruce protocol
As important as being physically well, what is often overlooked is the balance in a life. A good life is far broader than physical capability alone. Mental and social factors are also important. Interests that keep the grey matter stirring, exercised as much as the body, keep us vital. Feeding the soul through meaningful relationships and stopping to appreciate beautiful sights helps round us off, give purpose. Be busy in a way that keeps mind, body & soul healthy.
@@alwaysanotheradventure I agree, cracking video. I’m getting organised to retire in about eighteen months time and looking forward to being busy in a life of music, photography, mountains, biking, voluntary work etc etc The tragedy is the number of my colleagues wondering what they will do when they bail-out. They need exposure to your videos more than anyone!
It’s just an algorithmic estimate. You might want to look at the 6month option and see if it has changed over time. If your fitness has changed and your VO2max hasn’t, perhaps it’s less than accurate estimate. 😁
Why isn‘t the easiest way to increase VO2max a dietary program combined with specific exercise training focusing on decreasing total body weight while preserving as much muscle mass as possible? For example, a drop in body weight of 15 kg or even 20 kg would certainly help increase VO2max more than a month long series of high intensity interval training?
I'm trying to figure out how to measure and use this guidance "in real life". I'm skeptical of the conclusion that the "percentage of time" at high intensity (defined as Vo2 Max and above) is the criteria, because it implies an "inoculation" of sorts attributable to lower intensity activities. Further, as an example, it implies that in terms of potentially negative impacts to the heart, someone "training" 20 hours per week could do 4 hours per week of high intensity training while someone who is training, say, 5 hours per week is only allowed one hour per week of high intensity training. For one thing, if the high intensity training is defined as only the minutes engaged in output at or above Vo2 Max, then using the 4 minute hard interval example - one hour of intensity at Vo2Max would be 15 repeats and normally take at least 2 hours to complete, plus a warm up and cool down. Call it, two 1.5 hour training sessions per week. For a trained athlete over 60 Y.O., with some experience and established fitness that volume and intensity level might be achievable via two interval workout sessions spaced within a 5 hour per week total training protocol (due to the relatively light total load), provided that the 5 hours does not include days with FTP intervals. A 5 hour weekly total training time protocol would only leave 2 additional hours for lower intensity training. However, start bumping those total training hours up to 10, 15 or even 20 hours per week and I have a hard time believing that somehow it is "less harmful" for the athlete training 10 hours per week to engage in 1.5 hours (15% of time) of => Vo2Max training vs the 5 hour per week athlete doing 1.0 hours (20% of time) of high intensity. For it to be "less harmful" to engage in 1.5 hours of high intensity training per week under a 10 hour weekly training time allocation, then there must be an inoculation effect attributable to minutes at "lower intensity". I remain skeptical about the inoculation theory. Maybe the answer is that due to the need for more recovery time, it is rare for an "older" athlete to train (bike) at high intensity for more than 20% of total training time, UNLESS they abandon most lower intensity because the body cannot recover as quickly. And few older / experienced cyclists would want to spend all their time (in the winter) at Vo2Max in combination with almost no time at lower intensity because such an approach is generally inconsistent with the seasonal / monthly periodicity embraced for race training. Put another way, older cyclists that are willing to grind out lots of Vo2Max intervals will generally have a decent knowledge and experience with training theory and techniques and they generally won't be doing lots of Vo2Max in the middle of the winter. They will wait until later in their build phase. Sure, there are always outliers...So, maybe there is something "different" about athletes that chose to engage in extremely high percentages of time training at => Vo2Max? Maybe they are usually "less fit" or "novices"? In summary, are there people out there that are engaging almost exclusively in high intensity interval workouts on indoor trainers in the winter? No doubt there are some. But how does complementing that high intensity training with additional training at levels "lower than high intensity" inoculate them from the negative effects of "too much" high intensity training?
I don't think it's that complicated. So most of your exercising time easy and a bit of it hard. Work by feel, or RPE if you prefer to call it that. 80/20 is just a guide because external factors like sleep, stress, nutrition can throw out any hard-and-fast numbers. (Incidentally, that 4x4x4 counts as an hour of 'hard' by the time you build in warm up and cool down). I'm doing a session in April with some sports scientists in a lab to measure L1 and L2, to try to get clarity on zones (%HR is a proxy of a proxy).
@@alwaysanotheradventure I try and not get too deep into the data. I just like to enjoy riding my bike. I ride around 150 miles a week with 15k feet of elevation. I tried riding gravel but I found that I get a much more consistent workout riding pavement so I stick to that and do hikes off road. Cheers from California!
Men have evolved to be endurance hunters. in ancient times our large lungs, large heart, ability to sweat profusely when needed to shed heat and our bipedal stance offering a small target for solar gain, where all adaptions to that goal of chasing down faster animals, until they could run no more through exhaustion. Our bodies have not changed in such a short period, since those times and it should be no surprise that emulating that lifestyle will bring a long and healthy life, the same goes for meat eating within a balanced diet, which we were always meant to do, the clue is the more easier absorption of heme iron to none heme iron and our own history. So for a long and healthy life, stay slim, run or cycle maximally, regularly, don't smoke and don't drink alcohol and eat a balanced diet. By the way, in the past we used to chase our prey on grass, not on hard modern surfaces, which destroy knees. Endurance hunting - women less so, they have largely evolved to feed babies but over indulgence and obesity isn't good for women likewise, along with smoking and drinking alcohol.
According to several youtube videos ,where they compare lab. tests and garmin watches ,the two are quite close.Very small deviation on the garmin watches compared to the lab test.
Could you tell me where to find that research paper please? If you notice the Garmin and Apple algorithmic estimates came to different figures. The lab measured figure was different again (although I deliberately didn’t give that).
I'm sorry I failed to make that clear Liz. The data for men or women (and there's very little for women) doesn't matter. It's the relative data for yourself that matters, male or female. Comparing against a norm relative standard only works if you go to a lab to test. Way better is to compare yourself by the same method over time, in which case M or F is irrelevant. Sorry if that didn't come across.
I'm nearly 70 , female, run for 44 years, and my V02 max has been between 36 and 38 for past 18 months. Garmin tells me I am in top 10% for my 'real" age and my fitness age is 33. Very happy to be 33! I have an online English coach with WeRun who is great (as I live in France). as want to keep competing. I think the myth many people believe is that walking, jogging and cycling over distancesat a steady pace is enough (and incl. weights, stretching). You have to really push your HR regularly. E.g Treadmill incline, hills or speed work. I find it impossible to get my HR up enough on any kind of bike though. So for me it has to be running. We can have high expectations of our fitness as we age. Don't you think we can beat that 15% decline - if we work at it?
@@jotaylor1684 Absolutely aim to beat that 15%. Great that you're working with a coach - their motivation is one of the key things they bring. My personal thinking is to slow the decline as much as possible because you never know what's around the corner - one bike accident could wipe you out for months with the inevitable decline in fitness. Starting and staying as high as possible is a goal, which still being aware of the 80/20 rule. The cardiologist in the previous video made clear (and I have personal experience of this) that too much high intensity as part of your overall fitness diet is not great for an ageing heart.
@@alwaysanotheradventure I think I read from a Joe Friel book he mentions a 20 plus year study of fit college runner athletes over the decades. Vo2 declined for all but the athletes that maintained an exercise routine throughout the 20yr study declined at a much reduced percentage rate every decade compared to the young athletes that stopped exercise
Not really. Initial improvements in fitness, especially in previously sedentary people, are often surprisingly large (due to shifts in blood volume). You could never lose weight fast enough to have the same effect. But you are correct in identifying body mass as a component of how VO2max is expressed. But overall, the effects of fitness improvement and weight loss on functional fitness and health as we age are probably similar
If you believe you have super-high VO2max because a watch tells you so, then fantastic. Please remember that your Garmin / Apple / Polar VO2max produces an algorithmic estimate based on your activity profile. Some UA-cam videos compare these estimates with lab measured tests and find they're close, which is great for that individual with that activity profile. But it's not transferable to everyone, as all of us have different activity profiles. It's confirmed by te research paper linked in the video description. There's a significant difference shown in the video between my Garmin and Apple estimates and the lab measured test (the result of which I deliberately haven't given).
What is considered high intensity?
Agreed. I took a holiday in France, and did 1000km cycling in the alps - Garmin thought my VO2 went from my normal 51 to 59 in 2 weeks. Im 52, and this would be impossible to get to 95th percentile in just 2 weeks. Just use it (smartwatch etc) for trend analysis, not accurate numbers. Get a lab result, and compare to your smartwatch from then on.
Just curious as to why you didn't give the lab result.
I’ve been wearing a Garmin Venu 2 for the passed two years and also done two lab fitness tests. The VO2 max on my Garmin is exactly the same as the lab testing. 👍😊
same here, they are pretty much aligned in my case too
Hello Simon, I watched the interview with the climber/cardiologist and found it very useful. I'm 73 year old cyclist, sea kayaker and ex hockey player who still skates and loves the ice. I've recently gone through a series of exams with my cardiologist and then with an electrocardiologist. I'm in good shape, not to worry, but one fact was revealed that I hadn't anticipated, as we age we do need to taper some and not approach workouts with the intensity we might have twenty years earlier. I shared that video with my close cycling/skating friends and will share the Older Athlete series too.
Thanks for all the good work you do, Simon.
Hmmm … as the eighth decade has about 16 months to go and the ninth approaches, this video - and the series - provides a very helpful, information-packed and encouragement-laden context to my activities. Overall, staying physically active gives me a high level of gratitude for well, everything! And although some group activities have their downsides, overall, it’s being physically active in a social and supportive group setting that has the biggest impact on mental well-being. I hope you’ll cover this aspect in your Older Athlete Series. Thank you Simon.
Thank you for these videos! Most youtube cycling content is aimed at the younger riders and those of us 50+ don't always get the attention we deserve. Funny, since we're the ones able to spend the most money on bikes! Anyway, thanks again and please continue these types of videos along with your other excellent content. You've also piqued my interest in cycling in Scotland the next time I fly over from the states. Me and the wife seem to spend most of our cycling holidays in Switzerland or Austria so we need to change it up a bit.
Sounds great!
I’ve been watching different videos on declining and fitness as we age. I like what you said about the fitness app may not be accurate but as long as it’s consistent. I think it depends on your gps in the watch. I think as we age we may decline a bit but life is still great as long as we keep active and eat well, rest well. The way the body grows new cells as we age is incredible.
Such a brilliant UA-cam channel. I’m applying to join the fire service at 57 years old - Vo2 max is haunting my dreams at the moment as I have a gas analysis test coming in July. I think I’m around 42.5 which is what I need to achieve for the test, but your videos are so informative and evidence based. Many thanks.
That's quite a high figure to pass - the best of luck with it.
Agree about comparing yourself to yourself. After I read the book book 'Sports Gene', I realized the competition is with oneself. I've been cycling and working out consistently and with some intensity for 25+ years. In my mid fifties and I feel like I can do most, if not all, of what I could do in my 30s and 40s.
That's really interesting, Simon. Just checked what my Garmin estimates mine as. Age 62 in July, current score is 44. That's off cycling 50 miles per week average in 2023 and 75 per week so far in 2024. Please keep making your excellent films, sending you a big thank you.
Really useful. Having just entered my sixth decade, these are providing much food for thought, especially at managing the inevitable decline.
Couldn’t put it better myself - resisting the inevitable is THE struggle. 😁
Arguably the best, wisest content on this topic. Bravo! The saddest thing we see among our 60+ age peers is that old, vicious circle: the less energy they feel, the less active they become. A death trap. 😣
Thanks Simon for an informative video. I wear a Fitbit to track my progress, but have not done a VO2 max test. My approach to fitness is sustainability. Walking/hiking. Swimming, biking and strength training. In it for the long haul.
Thank you for sharing insights on Vo2max and its relevance to health span. Understanding Vo2max, the maximum rate of oxygen consumption during exercise, is crucial as it directly correlates with cardiovascular fitness and overall health. Elevated Vo2max levels indicate better heart and lung function, which are essential for maintaining optimal health span and reducing the risk of chronic diseases. Your explanation underscores the importance of monitoring Vo2max for promoting longevity and well-being.
Great Video and great series, getting a lot from them. As a 50 year i had spent the last few years getting myself ready fitness wise for older age : lost weight / eat sensible / took up triathlon as a sport. Then an unexpected heart issue before Christmas requiring open heart surgery has set me back, but I will come back from this over the next few years.
Ahh sorry to hear that. My heart twinge was nothing so serious, just a little warning. Hope you set a course for recovery that works.
Yesterday I (male age 63) underwent a VO2max lab test. The result is 51.3 ml/min/kg. At 15% decline per decade it won’t be before age 120 that my VO2max would drop below 20. Now I need to continue exercising (which I do 1.5 hrs a day)😅
I have a very high VO2max for my age in part due to the fact, with rare exception, I’ve been training hard 6 days a week for years. Recently my Garmin reported a 1 point decline although my training hasn’t changed. I’m guessing the decline is due to advancing age. But also I naturally gravitate to long zone 2 or 3 activities, long rides, swims, and runs at moderate pace. My coaches all encourage me to do high intensity intervals at least one training session per week but because that level of effort is especially painful for an old man I’ve been avoiding them, and that’s got to stop starting tomorrow. Thanks for the great motivational video Simon, keep them coming.
This is interesting but I was shocked by the 15% decline every 10 years 😳My vo2 max was measured in a lab when I was in my 30s and a competitive runner training around 90 miles/ week.Both my husband and my numbers were 75 for him and 70 for me.
He was an elite age group athlete and 20 years older than me.
My most recent accurate measurement is 58 and recently on Garmin similar and I’m now 68.
I can’t run as much (knees) now but train and race on the bike doing 2-3 hard interval workouts/ week, weights 2x week,3x in winter.Jump rope and short runs 3-4 / week.
The main difference from when I was younger is I have to rest more after these sessions to recover enough to maintain the training.
I also have an easy week every 4th week or if I’m tired.
I notice the test you did is on a treadmill.
Would that not favour someone who’s a runner?
Some cyclists are useless runners so would that not give a lower reading due to them not being running fit?
Sorry, long.
We're heading into specialist territory here, so I won't contribute BS. I had all this video checked by a true expert. One point I'd make re-Garmins is that we don't know the change the way they do is very tricky.
@@alwaysanotheradventure Ha Ha, not sure where I am on the BS scale but I will admit I feel like an imposter sometimes. My story is true, I’m 74 yo and my Garmin measured VO2max is 44 (recently down from 45). Garmin tells me my fitness age is 21 (recently up from 20) so there is a 53 year delta from my chronological age to my fitness age and I’m pretty proud of that. I think it means my current level of fitness would be about average for a 21 yo. I regularly compete in halfs, marathons, and short course triathlons. In local events I can usually get on the podium, in national events I usually finish towards the middle of my age group. I’m by no means an elite athlete and at major events there are always phenomenal athletes that dominate the age group. Am I just fighting off the physical decline that accompanies old age, or taking one last go at being a competitive endurance athlete, I’m not sure it matters because I relish the good health that comes with intense training. This morning instead of my usual slow 2-4K swim, I did 5 x 300m tempo sets and it felt totally right. My goals as an athlete may be unrealistic for a 74 yo but I don’t care because I’m not ready to accept the alternative. Thanks for the motivation and keep up the great work.
@@doernerrr I'm not for a second going to suggest anything like 'slow down a bit' but I am going to caution you about introducing higher intensity work very cautiously. You've been around athletics longer than I have been alive so I'm sure you've seen plenty of athletes get injured when they changed what they were doing too fast, too soon. If you do add intensity then also take out some volume to compensate. But by the sounds of things you are doing a phenomenal job already so you might want to consider 'if it ain't, broke don't fix it'.
I am 71 years of age with few stents in my heart. Would it surprise you if I tell you that my fitbit (sense) estimated my cardiologist fitness (vo2 max) at 56-69? I am sure that I am nowhere near as fit as you are. However, one thing I am very surprise to see is that you are jogging in some of your videos because when I jog like this, my hr reaches 150 very easily. Like you, I have been told not to exercise beyond hrs 135. That being the case, I find hiit is really a Jo,e for me.
Thanks for the wonderful video series
I trained hard and regularly in younger years and stopped around age 28 (now close to 48) - my weight went up to 18.2 stone and in Jan this year I stopped drinking alcohol (was a nightly drinker for years), and re-joined the gym. I could only do 25 min jog on treadmill low intensity with breaks to yesterday 60 mins with no breaks. I treated myself to a Garmin Fenix 7 Pro Solar and according to it's reports I'm well into the 50 segment of the VO2 Max graphic - Excellent and that I'm in top 10% for men aged 40-49. Not sure that says much for my age group :) As of this morning I am 16 stone 4lbs....no idea what my target should/will be, but I have a muscular frame and am 6'1, so thinking 14 to 14.5 stone.....
There’s huge variation in accuracy from the Garmin estimates - not measurements - between individuals and they don’t share their algorithms. It’s not worth comparing against a measured norm reference standards, just against yourself over time.
Same comment as others; my garmin Venu vO2 max is the same number (42 last year at age 64, and one other stress test a few years earlier). It tracks with how I feel, I feel pretty fit when I am at 42 or above, less so when it dips down to 40. I’ve also noticed that the number goes down even tho my training doesn’t change. My hard sessions are mostly on the bike (trainer or road) where my FTP is around 220. I also pay attention to HR elasticity, ie how fast the HR goes up in response to an effort and then how fast it recovers when the load is reduced. This last measure also is a really good surrogate for how fit I feel.
Turning 60 and I trail run 100km a week and cycle 10-12,000km a year plus alpine climbing and ski mountaineering. I keep myself lean and fit and while I love some post-run cookies, I also try to eat pretty healthy. I can't tell you my VO2 max, but I know I can still run a
And that is EXACTLY what matters!
What about weight training
Thanks a lot for these videos, Simon. They’re really helpful and superbly produced. So glad I came across them a couple of weeks ago, and recognised you from north east TV, as a Teessider by birth! I’m your age exactly, pretty fit and active, but you are inspiring me to greater levels of activity and fitness! 😊
Hi Mark - Look North feels like a different lifetime. Hope you start a little more activity - doing some is the biggest improvement you can make to your overall well being. You’ve give me the idea for another video 😁
Good video - thanks for posting. I would say modern smart watches are actually pretty good as Vo2Max. I (a 56yo male) had mine tasted in a lab at 57 for running and 52 for cycling. My Garmin 955 estimated 54 and 55 respectively so under 10% off.
It was close for you, but could be well out for others with different activity profiles.
fascinating as always. I had no idea I could see my estimated VO2 max on my watch so thanks for that.
The watch measures it, and the graphics show up on the phone app for Garmin (under Performance Statistics) and for the Apple Watch. I’m not sure about the Polar or Wahoo. Zwift has its own version as does Wahoo Systm.
I’m tempted to have a proper test. I do see an upward trend in my Garmin estimate. Over the couple of years it’s gone from high 30s to 51, and that seems to reflect the more structured work that I do on the bike. And more climbing. I’m 67 now, and hope to maintain and if I can, build more fitness. I got back into serious cycling about four years ago, after a long break. And feel so much better for it.
As you say, a wearable helps show we are moving in the right direction.
You might consider a lactate test - that would give you accurate zones.
I had my vo2 max tested three years ago when I was 69. My score was an excellent 53. At 72 my Fitbit says my fitness score is an excellent 50-54. 90% of my training is in zone two. My Concept 2 rower, total gym, and walking the hills in my neighborhood keeps me in shape. I workout six days a week.
Great video with alot of practical information 👌
Thank Simon. Excellent video, as ever 👍
This is a very good idea!! Thanks for starting this series🙏
I feel the virus pain! I was sick over the summer and went from 57 to 49 over 3 months of not being able to train. Good news was that rebound gains are a thing but it took 3 months to get it back (I’m 40). Now I’ve been hit with another illness.
I feel with sarcopenia you get a stair step decline when you are ill or injured. Becomes even more important to look after your immune system which intense vo2max style training actually blunts
Very true. I’m still not at 💯% after 10 weeks.
@@alwaysanotheradventureBrutal - I find I have to remind myself that I can do the activity in and of itself rather than be concerned about my previous pace/power.
Another wonderful video. Thank you! 🙏
So, there's still hope for me then. Just. But my 10 year plans are now 5 years long. Makes sense to me. Thanks for the stimulating videos in this series.
Thank you. That’s a really intersting way of looking at this.
At 53 , I've used the max hr rest hr and bodyweight vo2 max formulas and I seem to be around vo2 max of 40 .
My second hand xmas present garmin watch has my v02 max at 46 as the previous owner took at for a jog to test before selling , his rest hr was 50 😅.
Apparently Alaskan Huskies have a V02 max of 200. I reckon your hiking dog buddy at least a 100 💪 😅
I thought I had a reasonably good VO2max until this video. I changed from a fitbit Iconic to an Apple watch 8 after Fitbit put out a recall on the Iconic. The Iconic had me around 43-45 VO2max the Apple has me around 35.8 and 36 and even as high as 37.4 in October but only extrapolates those values when I do walks. It does not look at efforts when MTB riding which is disappointing as the Fitbit did and the MTB rides are vastly higher intensity and over a much greater time domain.
For some people the estimates match the lab tests, in others they don't. You can link Strava or Training Peaks (free) accounts to Apple so hopefully the MTB efforts are counted with the other Apple data.
So the message is folks, just keep getting out there and doing it - live and love life!
When I started running back in 2021 at age 56 I had a VO2Max from an Apple Watch of 33. That went up to 40 within a year. Since March 2022 I am using a Garmin Epix and there I started with 41 and now I am stable at 48 for more than half a year. Ha, in 1 month I will reach Excellent just by hitting 60.
That said in the past year I did not pay much attention to it (my watch does) as I am mostly working on Lactate Threshold and Endurance for Hal and Full Marathons.
Really great info and presented so well! Always love your videos and this series is awesome!
Glad you enjoy it
Been a serious cyclist for 40 years, plus gym, kayaking and hiking. I just turned 69 four months after breaking my ankle in 3 places. Starting to ride my road bike again and I'm amazed at how much fitness I've lost. Will I ever get it back and what's the best way to go about getting it back?
Thank you. Very useful!
mind over matter-keep pushing- now 63 and just cycled 55m+ return trip to Stamford Bridge.
Just do it…….🚴
Yep - 50 miles yesterday and shot a video in the middle of it.
Amazing content! You are a fantastic role model for all athletes. I have been training for 200k cycling gravel events, and completed one 2 weeks back and doing unbound in a week, feel fantastic… the catch which is disappointing is that my VO2max has dropped 15 points since the start of my training…. 😢 why do you think that is? Issues with garmin?
I honestly don’t know - if you feel you’re improving, and have perhaps set benchmarks (time or av watts up specific hill) then that’s what counts. Garmin doesn’t share details of how it works out VO2max. Oh and the BEST of good fortune for your event.
There is so much to consider beyond the simple number of your VO2Max score and you've made a good job at covering some of them, Simon. You are absolutely right that the number is less important than the trend.
But I want to add this for added context: as we age from age 35 onwards we tend to lose aerobic fitness (VO2Max) and strength (bone and muscle mass) at roughly the same rate. We also tend to gain weight (fat) in the same timeframe. Because VO2Max is a measurement of oxygen in relation to body weight one of the reasons for the decline in VO2Max is simply weight gain rather than any loss of capability in our cardiovascular systems (assuming no change in exercise habits) and that is also one of the underlying reasons that VO2Max and health span are intrinsically linked (obesity and poor health go hand in hand). So if we want an easy hack to improve our VO2Max then we could lose a few of the extra pounds that we tend to accumulate with advancing years (easier said than done). But consider that if you are doing what your doctor (should) order and doing enough weight training to increase bone and muscle mass you will be gaining weight and apparently making your VO2Max worse while doing a lot to improve your overall wellbeing... VO2Max does not tell anywhere near the whole story when it comes to health span (or even for predicting athletic performance) but it is relatively easy to measure and is therefore given plenty of attention.
I want to be a voice of caution here. There is a current vogue amongst the health and fitness professionals to look at VO2Max as the Most Important Thing when it comes to longevity. It is important and, as you point out, if it drops below a certain level you become a non-functioning human being. But generally speaking, people with a VO2Max below 20 are those with serious health problems like heart failure and those of us who keep even moderately active by walking regularly will avoid declining to that level. Most of the audience of this channel are already considerably more active than this in a cardiovascular fitness sense, though I have my doubts if most are as a strong as they could be or as focussed on that aspect of fitness as they should be. Loss of muscular strength will lead to the inability to do cardiovascular exercise far more rapidly than declining VO2Max will. A short illness like the one you have just experienced can be bounced back from in 6 weeks if you have the underlying muscular strength to allow you to exercise again. All too often older people do not and therefore a short illness can be the start of terminal decline.
I don't think u can out exercise a bad diet over the years, especially saturated fat stuff. I looked at that as I have about 8kg I can definitely lose. As a rough guide using a vo2 calculator, seem around 3kg plus minus 500g to gain 1 vo2 max score
@@dingobeaver6919 if you can lose that 8kg then you will do yourself way more favours than improving your VO2Max ever will.
@@HughDWallace definitely true 👍
You are 100% correct regarding the role of body mass in relative VO2max estimates - as you say, an overweight individual can improve their VO2max (in mL/kg/min) by simply losing weight [Of course, the same does not apply to absolute VO2max, expressed as L/min]. However, videos like this one can only cover so much before it gets (a) too long, and (b) too bogged down in scientific detail that can confuse the central message. By their nature, they need to focus on one (or two) things at a time and in doing so, are more effective at helping a larger audience.
In terms of simple messages, the best is probably something like "Stay active, maintain a healthy weight, and eat healthy food" Even within each of those three components, simple messages help a wider audience. More complicated, specific, scientifically accurate messages are often not translatable for most of the general public.
@@davidrowe8747 You make very good points, David, but the main one I respectfully, but fundamentally, disagree with: simple messages don't deliver and the general public are capable of absorbing a lot more nuance than the health & fitness - and especially the medical - world appear to think.
Roughly half of all people don't exercise enough and most would be served well by 'just move more' and are well aware of that message but it is clearly not working. The other half do move more but (for various reasons) want to do even more and go looking for additional information. The followers of this channel fall into that camp and I include myself in their number (though my day job is in exercise science and I have worked in the health system too so have some additional understanding that most people will lack). But when we start looking for information where do we go and what sources do we trust? 'Ah! Dr. So and so must know what he is talking about, surely?'. Not necessarily because there is a very good chance that any doctor or sports scientist who is talking in the public sphere about health and longevity is heavily influenced by performance based sports science not exercise science or metabolic health (and all the metabolic health specialists I follow appear to have glaring gaps in their knowledge about exercise science too). (One of the world's pre-eminent sports scientists - and medical doctor - only came to realise the importance of metabolic health and strength training after he had retired from academic life yet the scientific evidence in support of both have been around for a long, long time...)
There are essentially two camps of available information: the overly simplified ("just move more") and the overly complicated. The fitness world likes to complicate things because it keeps it interesting for the trainer and client alike but while a tiny proportion of people actually engage the services of a trainer the influence of the fitness industry (and it is an industry aimed at profit generation above all else) is widespread and most of us have absorbed its messages, good or bad. The medical advice available from most doctors & physios generally falls into the overly simplified camp because, quite frankly, while the medical system is pretty good at fixing broken people it is not very good at stopping people degenerate into ill health in the first place. Medical practitioners are not taught a whole lot about exercise science, though some will have delved into sports science (the two are not the same though are closely related) and the academic study into longevity, health and exercise is pretty ill-informed at the moment anyway.
At the other end of the spectrum are the sports scientists and performance coaches who are looking to maximise performance in elite athletes. But the experiences of elite athletes is a world apart from 95% (plus) of the rest of human species and the things they do to make the tiny incremental gains that allow them to win medals is not the same as what they did to get in contention in the first place. For example, there is a lot being made about Zone Training at the moment (80% at Z2, 20% in Z5) and pointing out that this is what the top runners and cyclists do. As a sports scientist interested in performance I find that fascinating. As an exercise scientist interested in increasing health span I need to realise that 20% of an elite marathon runner's training is approximately 2-2.5 hours at Zone 5 every week! As a recreational runner who might run for 2-3 hours a week I wonder how relevant that is to me...
My purpose of commenting below Simon's excellent videos is two fold: I hope to point him in the direction of other areas of learning and maybe inspire another video or two for us all to benefit from. But I also want the viewers to remain sceptical enough to keep looking further. I spent 20 years as a (low performing) endurance athlete before I was forced to learn that strength training and metabolic health were enormously important to my health (and completely under appreciated in the endurance sport world and in academic sports science in general). I am now an even better endurance athlete (still low performing and a cyclist rather than a runner) at age 49 thanks to 10 years of strength training and sorting out what I was eating. And because I am trained in health science (and continually update my knowledge) I know the evidence is there to support my n=1 experiences but that evidence is not currently well known or well circulated by fitness influencers on social media at the moment.
I've been laid low with a chesty virus thing for 8 weeks now, hardly exercising so I will be gauging my efforts as I slowly start getting active again. I purchased a new garmin vívoactive 5 and it seems to take a while for it guage my numbers so my vO2max hasn't changed from my old garmin.
I doubt I will ever do a lab test so just intend to use its reading as a guide of my fitness. It does report my stress levels as a lot higher since the new watch arrived though!
I got the Vo2Max lab test at age of 45 and I got the figure for around 52.5 and now I am 62 and my Garmin 965 Smart watch give me the figure of 48 and I double check with my current 5K finish time and I think my current VO2Max around 41 to 43 around. But My Garmin watch just indicate me that my VO2Max is improving for the past 24 month.
Hey Alfred. -Garmin keeps its algorithm secret but on its website it refers to VO2max as an estimate. So you’re right not to compare it to your lab measured number. However, the change over time should be correct. There are other self-estimate ways to get your VO2max and I’ll do a video on those soon.
I am determined that as I approach 60 and beyond that my children and family members will NEVER have any say on putting me in some nursing home or taking care of me because I did not take the best care of myself. They lie a lot.
I am continuing my fitness routine at 77 & will like to get a 50 VO2 . Had a 69 on treadmill at 44 . Agree with your thoughts & looking forward to future videos .Greetings from Sydney.
Im in my 50s mixing up triathlon training with hyrox training, looking forward to retirement to make it easier to schedule training. I know my VO2 but its more a curiosity to me: my metric is whether I can still compete in events and races
I couldn't put it better myself. Those folks who feel they have high VO2max because their Garmin says so might get quite a surprise if they race...
Good stuff
15% is a big number to overcome. I won’t be doing a VO2Max test. Avoiding becoming frail is a key, a bout of pneumonia will do it. Maintaining all you can for as long as a you can is very key. My 80 yr old mum is a top 3% Strava active user. She doesn’t do marathons but she does a decent walk and sometimes a bike ride just about every day.
You can’t outrun or outlive a Crap diet. Your diet is you.
I suspect this story needs to be seen by the sedate majority.
I was thinking about a video ‘show this to your friends’. Separately - great podcast for you Adventure Audio Podcast from Calgary. The one with 4iii in the subject heading. Host talks about his set up for biking in -44c 🥶. I thought about you and your ride.
@@alwaysanotheradventure ha ha !!!! You do have to be very careful below -25C. Above that and it’s very nice indeed unless there is high winds.
@@alwaysanotheradventure healthy living - converting the whole country is a lost cause, just look at the profits of Greggs, Burger King, McDonalds. It’s a time bomb of very bad health indeed. Excessively overweight is near the norm now. My cousin did have a bariatric ambulance service operating for some years. His small fleet of double size ambulances was always on the road. Specialist lifting kit for people unable to move under their own steam was £100k each item I think.
These are extreme obese people you don’t see as they never leave home.
I am 58, and my VO2 max is 55 at present. I am a runner and I run a range of intervals fast and slow
Lab measured or estimate from watch?
Is there an Apple App that can be used for estimating VO2max or are you referring to the Apple watch? Thank you, great video.
It shows up in the Apple Health app, and I THINK that can draw data from Strava, T.Peaks etc. regardless of wearables. I only really noticed it and started using the Health App after I bought an Apple Watch.
I am 78 years old. Since retiring, I have taken a couple of bad falls that have left me with an artificial hip, some spinal damage, and a significant limp. I am no longer able to run. My limp impedes my ability to do a normal one mile walk test. (I can walk a few miles, but I'm very slow and it's painful.) I also have a cardiac pacemaker (for bradycardia) and take a variety of medicines (low dose propanol) that may interfere with normal heart functions.
I do cycle regularly on a recumbent tadpole trike with an electric assist. I normally ride for about 2 hours at 11.5 mph. I use a chest strap heart monitor in conjunction with my Apple Watch (5). I track all my walks and rides with Strava, which is linked to my Apple Watch. That setup seems to give me good data. I have tracked my data since 2020.
Since I can't run and have difficulty walking, doing one of the normal VO2 Max tests is not an option. My Apple Watch does not automatically calculate a VO2 Max from my walks.
Will it work if I use my resting heart rate from the Apple Watch in conjunction with the Max Heart Rate from my rides to estimate my VO2 Max? The formula I found is VO2 Max = (Max HR/Resting HR*15.3)
Thanks in advance for your answer.
Dave Althaus
I'd love to help Dave but I'm not an expert. I go to the people who really know their stuff then put it into videos in an understandable way. You're going to need to ask a real expert, sorry.
@@alwaysanotheradventure - Thanks. I work with a couple of Electrophysiologist at Duke Medical. I’ll see if they can talk to the subject. If I learn anything, I will share it. Please keep up the good work. Your videos are ver helpful to me.
Most research that I am aware of shows mild (single digit) increase in VO2 max over weeks but I do not recall longer term multi year studies that show major changes (>20). Always thought our mother given mitrochondrial talent played key role until I learned that Olympian high jumpers lived longer than olympic endurance athletes. My assumption now is that “Mind matters” and high jumpers have the best life tools since there competition teaches them how to deal with failure.
The mind and its role in endurance sport is a highly contested issue. I'm reading Endure by Alex Hutchinson and it's fascinating.
Great series thanks for creating. BTW, An American physician Peter Attia has good guidance for healthspan. Hes a qualified thoracic surgeon not a crank.
His book Outlive is excellent - gave it to my brother in law at Christmas. I find his podcast a lttle technical, but interesting.
Peter Attia IS NOT a qualified thoracic surgeon. I love what he does but he is not that. Let’s try to not diffuse falsehoods here.
My Apple watch says 32.1 my stress test shows 11.1 METS which is x 3.5 = 39.55 VO2 Max. Doing it in a lab these days is not really necessary. Agree it is more important to see changes on your device which probably consistent at least. 7 months ago I had open heart surgery for valves not coronary. I will be 80 this year! I am up 11% since before surgery. I think another 6 months of training I will get it higher. 10 minutes on Bruce protocol
As important as being physically well, what is often overlooked is the balance in a life. A good life is far broader than physical capability alone. Mental and social factors are also important. Interests that keep the grey matter stirring, exercised as much as the body, keep us vital. Feeding the soul through meaningful relationships and stopping to appreciate beautiful sights helps round us off, give purpose.
Be busy in a way that keeps mind, body & soul healthy.
I couldn’t agree more - that’s why this is part of a series. See ‘Give A Fu*k’ video.
@@alwaysanotheradventure I agree, cracking video. I’m getting organised to retire in about eighteen months time and looking forward to being busy in a life of music, photography, mountains, biking, voluntary work etc etc The tragedy is the number of my colleagues wondering what they will do when they bail-out. They need exposure to your videos more than anyone!
Thanks!
Thanks very much for the support
Hello Simon, We are curious if you have found any data on the long term effects of covid on VO2Max?
It’s not something I’ve looked at
According to my Garmin, my VO2 max is 57 and I’m 67.
It’s just an algorithmic estimate.
You might want to look at the 6month option and see if it has changed over time. If your fitness has changed and your VO2max hasn’t, perhaps it’s less than accurate estimate. 😁
@@alwaysanotheradventure It has stayed at 56/57 for over a year.
Unchanging for over a year would make me think mine was inaccurate. Most people’s fitness varies over the course of a year, even a pro athlete.
@@infocuslearningwhat does Garmin give for fitness age?
@@stevemurray710 It says “Your Fitness Age is 20.”
Why isn‘t the easiest way to increase VO2max a dietary program combined with specific exercise training focusing on decreasing total body weight while preserving as much muscle mass as possible? For example, a drop in body weight of 15 kg or even 20 kg would certainly help increase VO2max more than a month long series of high intensity interval training?
Weight is a crucial factor you’re right
Thanks
Thank you Mark!
67 and VO2 max is 42 . Wish it was higher . At 40 years old, it was 62
Remember the tale of the Flying Finns. They ran on hilly terrain and challenged them selves by do fartlek training.
I'm trying to figure out how to measure and use this guidance "in real life". I'm skeptical of the conclusion that the "percentage of time" at high intensity (defined as Vo2 Max and above) is the criteria, because it implies an "inoculation" of sorts attributable to lower intensity activities. Further, as an example, it implies that in terms of potentially negative impacts to the heart, someone "training" 20 hours per week could do 4 hours per week of high intensity training while someone who is training, say, 5 hours per week is only allowed one hour per week of high intensity training.
For one thing, if the high intensity training is defined as only the minutes engaged in output at or above Vo2 Max, then using the 4 minute hard interval example - one hour of intensity at Vo2Max would be 15 repeats and normally take at least 2 hours to complete, plus a warm up and cool down. Call it, two 1.5 hour training sessions per week. For a trained athlete over 60 Y.O., with some experience and established fitness that volume and intensity level might be achievable via two interval workout sessions spaced within a 5 hour per week total training protocol (due to the relatively light total load), provided that the 5 hours does not include days with FTP intervals. A 5 hour weekly total training time protocol would only leave 2 additional hours for lower intensity training.
However, start bumping those total training hours up to 10, 15 or even 20 hours per week and I have a hard time believing that somehow it is "less harmful" for the athlete training 10 hours per week to engage in 1.5 hours (15% of time) of => Vo2Max training vs the 5 hour per week athlete doing 1.0 hours (20% of time) of high intensity.
For it to be "less harmful" to engage in 1.5 hours of high intensity training per week under a 10 hour weekly training time allocation, then there must be an inoculation effect attributable to minutes at "lower intensity". I remain skeptical about the inoculation theory.
Maybe the answer is that due to the need for more recovery time, it is rare for an "older" athlete to train (bike) at high intensity for more than 20% of total training time, UNLESS they abandon most lower intensity because the body cannot recover as quickly. And few older / experienced cyclists would want to spend all their time (in the winter) at Vo2Max in combination with almost no time at lower intensity because such an approach is generally inconsistent with the seasonal / monthly periodicity embraced for race training. Put another way, older cyclists that are willing to grind out lots of Vo2Max intervals will generally have a decent knowledge and experience with training theory and techniques and they generally won't be doing lots of Vo2Max in the middle of the winter. They will wait until later in their build phase. Sure, there are always outliers...So, maybe there is something "different" about athletes that chose to engage in extremely high percentages of time training at => Vo2Max? Maybe they are usually "less fit" or "novices"?
In summary, are there people out there that are engaging almost exclusively in high intensity interval workouts on indoor trainers in the winter? No doubt there are some. But how does complementing that high intensity training with additional training at levels "lower than high intensity" inoculate them from the negative effects of "too much" high intensity training?
I don't think it's that complicated. So most of your exercising time easy and a bit of it hard. Work by feel, or RPE if you prefer to call it that. 80/20 is just a guide because external factors like sleep, stress, nutrition can throw out any hard-and-fast numbers. (Incidentally, that 4x4x4 counts as an hour of 'hard' by the time you build in warm up and cool down).
I'm doing a session in April with some sports scientists in a lab to measure L1 and L2, to try to get clarity on zones (%HR is a proxy of a proxy).
I’m 63 and my Garmin tells me my VO2 max is 48. I do three tough bike rides a week. Seems to be stuck at 48, I can’t seem to get it to move
Given your fitness probably fluctuates over the year like most people I would regard that figure with scepticism.
@@alwaysanotheradventure I try and not get too deep into the data. I just like to enjoy riding my bike. I ride around 150 miles a week with 15k feet of elevation. I tried riding gravel but I found that I get a much more consistent workout riding pavement so I stick to that and do hikes off road. Cheers from California!
Men have evolved to be endurance hunters. in ancient times our large lungs, large heart, ability to sweat profusely when needed to shed heat and our bipedal stance offering a small target for solar gain, where all adaptions to that goal of chasing down faster animals, until they could run no more through exhaustion. Our bodies have not changed in such a short period, since those times and it should be no surprise that emulating that lifestyle will bring a long and healthy life, the same goes for meat eating within a balanced diet, which we were always meant to do, the clue is the more easier absorption of heme iron to none heme iron and our own history. So for a long and healthy life, stay slim, run or cycle maximally, regularly, don't smoke and don't drink alcohol and eat a balanced diet. By the way, in the past we used to chase our prey on grass, not on hard modern surfaces, which destroy knees. Endurance hunting - women less so, they have largely evolved to feed babies but over indulgence and obesity isn't good for women likewise, along with smoking and drinking alcohol.
According to several youtube videos ,where they compare lab. tests and garmin watches ,the two are quite close.Very small deviation on the garmin watches compared to the lab test.
Could you tell me where to find that research paper please? If you notice the Garmin and Apple algorithmic estimates came to different figures. The lab measured figure was different again (although I deliberately didn’t give that).
@@alwaysanotheradventure Maybe this is a nice video to watch (i treid a vo2 max+lactate test-how accurate is my garmin watch ) by laura try
I watched a vid this week where the guy tested his garmin watch to a lab test and tge difference for his was about 8
Please see my pinned comment in which I reply in advance to this. Clearly 8 is a lot!
@@alwaysanotheradventure 5 to 8% is a lot.I agree with you that it is beter to compare your vo2 with own vo2 for improvement
Old man yells at clouds (watches)
Love my smart watch
Gd stuff!
Please include women. A little biased that you don't include us. Really??😮
I'm sorry I failed to make that clear Liz. The data for men or women (and there's very little for women) doesn't matter. It's the relative data for yourself that matters, male or female. Comparing against a norm relative standard only works if you go to a lab to test. Way better is to compare yourself by the same method over time, in which case M or F is irrelevant. Sorry if that didn't come across.
I used my mile time to estimate, close enough for me
Exactly! I’ve done two of those self tests for a future episode. It’s change over time that matters not against some absolute standard.
I'm nearly 70 , female, run for 44 years, and my V02 max has been between 36 and 38 for past 18 months. Garmin tells me I am in top 10% for my 'real" age and my fitness age is 33. Very happy to be 33! I have an online English coach with WeRun who is great (as I live in France). as want to keep competing. I think the myth many people believe is that walking, jogging and cycling over distancesat a steady pace is enough (and incl. weights, stretching). You have to really push your HR regularly. E.g Treadmill incline, hills or speed work. I find it impossible to get my HR up enough on any kind of bike though. So for me it has to be running. We can have high expectations of our fitness as we age. Don't you think we can beat that 15% decline - if we work at it?
@@jotaylor1684 Absolutely aim to beat that 15%. Great that you're working with a coach - their motivation is one of the key things they bring. My personal thinking is to slow the decline as much as possible because you never know what's around the corner - one bike accident could wipe you out for months with the inevitable decline in fitness. Starting and staying as high as possible is a goal, which still being aware of the 80/20 rule. The cardiologist in the previous video made clear (and I have personal experience of this) that too much high intensity as part of your overall fitness diet is not great for an ageing heart.
@@alwaysanotheradventure I think I read from a Joe Friel book he mentions a 20 plus year study of fit college runner athletes over the decades. Vo2 declined for all but the athletes that maintained an exercise routine throughout the 20yr study declined at a much reduced percentage rate every decade compared to the young athletes that stopped exercise
Isn't the fastest way to improve VO2 max is to lose weight?
Very good point!
Not really. Initial improvements in fitness, especially in previously sedentary people, are often surprisingly large (due to shifts in blood volume). You could never lose weight fast enough to have the same effect. But you are correct in identifying body mass as a component of how VO2max is expressed. But overall, the effects of fitness improvement and weight loss on functional fitness and health as we age are probably similar