High pulse

"CB" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

what is the cause of high pulse rate. BP reading is good around 135/80.

Thanks

I think you need to be a little more specific. How high is high? Also I assume
you are talking over an extended period. Do you mean over a period of days,
months, many years? Also is that consistent throughout the day? What about
when you first wake up? What is your resting pulse rate? When was this first
noticed?

There are many possible causes. Being out of shape is one. Anxiety is another.
Caffeine can also raise heart rate.

Bill - not a Dr.

Generally reading taken around 9am every day and its been 100 to 105 for 14
days now ( this is a resting rate).
"Bill" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"CB" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

what is the cause of high pulse rate. BP reading is good around 135/80.

Thanks

I think you need to be a little more specific. How high is high? Also I

assume

Quoted message said:

you are talking over an extended period. Do you mean over a period of

days,

Quoted message said:

months, many years? Also is that consistent throughout the day? What about
when you first wake up? What is your resting pulse rate? When was this

first

Quoted message said:

noticed?

There are many possible causes. Being out of shape is one. Anxiety is

another.

Quoted message said:

Caffeine can also raise heart rate.

Bill - not a Dr.

"CB" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Generally reading taken around 9am every day and its been 100 to 105 for 14
days now ( this is a resting rate).

OK. Is this new or do you not know? Can you correlate this with any other
changes in your life? What process do you go through to take your pulse? Have
you tried taking your pulse at a different time of day while lying down for,
say, 1 min.? Are you in good shape physically?

You may wish to give your Dr. a call - if for no other reason to put your mind
at ease.

Bill

Actually its a friend of mine who has this problem, only started about 2 to
3 weeks ago. He uses electronic BP monitor.
Physical condition - average, in his 50`s.
"Bill" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"CB" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Generally reading taken around 9am every day and its been 100 to 105 for

14

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

days now ( this is a resting rate).

OK. Is this new or do you not know? Can you correlate this with any other
changes in your life? What process do you go through to take your pulse?

Have

Quoted message said:

you tried taking your pulse at a different time of day while lying down

for,

Quoted message said:

say, 1 min.? Are you in good shape physically?

You may wish to give your Dr. a call - if for no other reason to put your

mind

Quoted message said:

at ease.

Bill

OK. It does sound a little high to me. I have only two guesses as to what
might be the cause. 1. Some kind of anxiety. This might be associated with
whatever prompted taking frequent BP readings. Once you think it is high, you
might become worried that it will be high when you take it next time - causing
it to be so. Try taking the reading at a different time of day and in a
different setting and see if the result changes significantly. 2. Some problem
with the instrument. Try confirming by taking his pulse manually.

But it could be lots of other things or nothing at all. As I said, it would
probably be best if he gave his Dr. a call. Maybe someone else here has
additional ideas.

Bill
"CB" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Actually its a friend of mine who has this problem, only started about 2 to
3 weeks ago. He uses electronic BP monitor.
Physical condition - average, in his 50`s.
"Bill" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"CB" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Generally reading taken around 9am every day and its been 100 to 105 for

14

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

days now ( this is a resting rate).

OK. Is this new or do you not know? Can you correlate this with any other
changes in your life? What process do you go through to take your pulse?

Have

Quoted message said:

you tried taking your pulse at a different time of day while lying down

for,

Quoted message said:

say, 1 min.? Are you in good shape physically?

You may wish to give your Dr. a call - if for no other reason to put your

mind

Quoted message said:

at ease.

Bill

"Bill" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

OK. It does sound a little high to me. I have only two guesses as to

what

Quoted message said:

might be the cause. 1. Some kind of anxiety. This might be associated

with

Quoted message said:

whatever prompted taking frequent BP readings. Once you think it is

high, you

Quoted message said:

might become worried that it will be high when you take it next time -

causing

Quoted message said:

it to be so. Try taking the reading at a different time of day and in

a

Quoted message said:

different setting and see if the result changes significantly. 2. Some

problem

Quoted message said:

with the instrument. Try confirming by taking his pulse manually.

But it could be lots of other things or nothing at all. As I said, it

would

Quoted message said:

probably be best if he gave his Dr. a call. Maybe someone else here

has

Quoted message said:

additional ideas.

No additional ideas but support to your suggestion that if his HR is
that high, it warrants a visit to the Dr.

Phil Holman

That's quite high and may be a cause for concern if it is not a
temporary situation (anxiety, illness, caffeine, meds). The vast
majority of diabetics die from heart disease. A high resting pulse
that is not temporary is a marker for increased mortality risk. The
pulse rate should be confirmed by manual counting for 60 seconds. A
resting pulse of 96 or higher triples the CHD risk for men.

"CB" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Generally reading taken around 9am every day and its been 100 to 105 for 14
days now ( this is a resting rate).
"Bill" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"CB" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

what is the cause of high pulse rate. BP reading is good around 135/80.

Thanks

I think you need to be a little more specific. How high is high? Also I

assume

Quoted message said:

you are talking over an extended period. Do you mean over a period of

days,

Quoted message said:

months, many years? Also is that consistent throughout the day? What about
when you first wake up? What is your resting pulse rate? When was this

first

Quoted message said:

noticed?

There are many possible causes. Being out of shape is one. Anxiety is

another.

Quoted message said:

Caffeine can also raise heart rate.

Bill - not a Dr.

CB said:

what is the cause of high pulse rate. BP reading is good around 135/80.

Thanks

There are many potential causes. What are you calling high?

Humbly,

Andrew

--
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist
http://www.heartmdphd.com/

What would you class as `normal` resting pulse?
"Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

CB said:

what is the cause of high pulse rate. BP reading is good around 135/80.

Thanks

There are many potential causes. What are you calling high?

Humbly,

Andrew

--
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist
http://www.heartmdphd.com/

CB said:

What would you class as `normal` resting pulse?

Between 50 and 100.

Humbly,

Andrew

--
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist
http://www.heartmdphd.com/

Wed, 03 Dec 2003 10:02:09 -0500 in article
<[email hidden]> "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"

Quoted message said:

CB said:

What would you class as `normal` resting pulse?

Between 50 and 100.

Perhaps for people who don't exercise. Regular exercise can bring resting
pulse down considerably, if your heart is still healthy. When I used to
jog regularly, my resting pulse was usually about 42. Some top endurance
athletes can have resting pulse below 30.

Matti Narkia said:

Wed, 03 Dec 2003 10:02:09 -0500 in article
<[email hidden]> "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"

Quoted message said:

CB said:

What would you class as `normal` resting pulse?

Between 50 and 100.

Perhaps for people who don't exercise. Regular exercise can bring resting
pulse down considerably, if your heart is still healthy. When I used to
jog regularly, my resting pulse was usually about 42. Some top endurance
athletes can have resting pulse below 30.

Matti,

Is it your belief that a heart rate between 30 and 100 is normal?

If you wish to challenge me on this, perhaps you should provide the
evidence. Remember that this is being archived and folks will be able to
summon this up any time in the future to discredit you.

Humbly,

Andrew

--
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist
http://www.heartmdphd.com/

Wed, 03 Dec 2003 11:02:30 -0500 in article
<[email hidden]> "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"

Quoted message said:

Matti Narkia said:

Wed, 03 Dec 2003 10:02:09 -0500 in article
<[email hidden]> "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"

Quoted message said:

CB wrote:

> What would you class as `normal` resting pulse?

Between 50 and 100.

Perhaps for people who don't exercise. Regular exercise can bring resting
pulse down considerably, if your heart is still healthy. When I used to
jog regularly, my resting pulse was usually about 42. Some top endurance
athletes can have resting pulse below 30.

Matti,

Is it your belief that a heart rate between 30 and 100 is normal?

Well, it depends what is the reference population. For healthy young adult
to middleage people 100 is hardly normal, or at least it would indicate
poor physical condition, if nothing else. I would put an upper limit of
about 70-80 for them. Older people or people with previous heart problems
are a different story. For endurance athletes resting pulse rates below 50
are very common and among them rates below 30 have been reported.

Quoted message said:

If you wish to challenge me on this, perhaps you should provide the
evidence. Remember that this is being archived and folks will be able to
summon this up any time in the future to discredit you.

It's my guess that you are not familiar with the exercise induced
physiological characteristics of top class endurance athletes. See for
example:

Cantwell JD.
Cardiovascular aspects of running.
Clin Sports Med. 1985 Oct;4(4):627-40. Review
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=3902253&dopt=Abstract>
( http://tinyurl.com/xk1i )

"... The typical runner tends to have a slow resting pulse rate and a
high maximal oxygen consumption. Echocardiographic studies show that
distance runners have larger, thicker left ventricles than do
sedentary controls; their hearts are more efficient than those of
sedentary people, pumping a larger volume per beat. Physiologic
findings on examination of well-trained runners can sometimes be
confused with pathologic entities. The "athlete's heart," once
believed to be an abnormal condition, is now recognized as
representing a highly efficient organ. ..."

and

Jensen-Urstad K, Saltin B, Ericson M, Storck N, Jensen-Urstad M.
Pronounced resting bradycardia in male elite runners is associated with
high heart rate variability.
Scand J Med Sci Sports. 1997 Oct;7(5):274-8.
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=9338944&dopt=Abstract>
( http://tinyurl.com/xk5j )

"... The athletes had pronounced bradycardia during the night-time,
with heart rate calculated from four RR intervals < 30 beats/min in
five runners. ..."

Matti Narkia said:

Wed, 03 Dec 2003 11:02:30 -0500 in article
<[email hidden]> "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"

Quoted message said:

Matti Narkia said:

Wed, 03 Dec 2003 10:02:09 -0500 in article
<[email hidden]> "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
<[email hidden]> wrote:

>CB wrote:
>
>> What would you class as `normal` resting pulse?
>
>Between 50 and 100.
>
Perhaps for people who don't exercise. Regular exercise can bring resting
pulse down considerably, if your heart is still healthy. When I used to
jog regularly, my resting pulse was usually about 42. Some top endurance
athletes can have resting pulse below 30.

Matti,

Is it your belief that a heart rate between 30 and 100 is normal?

Well, it depends what is the reference population.

The truth is that a heart rate between 50 and 100 is *defined* to be normal.

An adult with a resting heart rate of 100 bpm or more is diagnosed with tachycardia.

An adult with a resting heart rate of 50 bpm or less is diagnosed with bradycardia.

These are definitions and not opinions.

You certainly may assert that the bradycardia in an athlete is secondary to athleticism rather than
pathology but it will not change the fact there is bradycardia... and I would still want to see the EKG
before agreeing with you about the former.

Respectfully, you are out of your league on many levels, Matti.

Humbly,

Andrew

--
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist
http://www.heartmdphd.com/

Wed, 03 Dec 2003 15:26:28 -0500 in article
<[email hidden]> "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"

Quoted message said:

Matti Narkia wrote:

You certainly may assert that the bradycardia in an athlete is secondary to athleticism rather than
pathology but it will not change the fact there is bradycardia... and I would still want to see the EKG
before agreeing with you about the former.

So it seems that I was right when I suspected that you are not familiar
with exercise induced physiological characteristics of top class endurance
athletes. Check Medline or whatever reliable sources you wish, for the
start I've already provided you with references of two peer-reviewed
publications.

Wed, 03 Dec 2003 15:26:28 -0500 in article
<[email hidden]> "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"

Quoted message said:

The truth is that a heart rate between 50 and 100 is *defined* to be normal.

Definition which defines young physically active, fit persons with healthy
hearts as having "abnormal" resting heart rate is not satisfactory, IMHO.
Either one should reduce the lower limit of the overall range or, IMHO
preferably, have different ranges for different subpopulations. Perhaps
these different range definitions already exist, I wouldn't know about it?

Matti Narkia said:

Wed, 03 Dec 2003 15:26:28 -0500 in article
<[email hidden]> "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"

Quoted message said:

Matti Narkia wrote:

You certainly may assert that the bradycardia in an athlete is secondary to athleticism rather than
pathology but it will not change the fact there is bradycardia... and I would still want to see the EKG
before agreeing with you about the former.

So it seems that I was right when I suspected that you are not familiar
with exercise induced physiological characteristics of top class endurance
athletes.

You are not correct.

Quoted message said:

Check Medline or whatever reliable sources you wish, for the
start I've already provided you with references of two peer-reviewed
publications.

I am familiar with the sources you listed and more.

Can you say you were familiar with the definition of bradycardia?

Didn't think so.

Respectfully, you remain out of your league on several levels, Matti.

Humbly,

Andrew

--
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist
http://www.heartmdphd.com/

Wed, 03 Dec 2003 16:00:06 -0500 in article
<[email hidden]> "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"

Quoted message said:

Matti Narkia said:

Wed, 03 Dec 2003 15:26:28 -0500 in article
<[email hidden]> "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"

Quoted message said:

Matti Narkia wrote:

You certainly may assert that the bradycardia in an athlete is secondary to athleticism rather than
pathology but it will not change the fact there is bradycardia... and I would still want to see the EKG
before agreeing with you about the former.

So it seems that I was right when I suspected that you are not familiar
with exercise induced physiological characteristics of top class endurance
athletes.

You are not correct.

Your posting behavior shows otherwise.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Check Medline or whatever reliable sources you wish, for the
start I've already provided you with references of two peer-reviewed
publications.

I am familiar with the sources you listed and more.

Now you are. If you were also earlier, it didn't come through in you
messages.

Matti Narkia said:

Wed, 03 Dec 2003 15:26:28 -0500 in article
<[email hidden]> "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"

Quoted message said:

The truth is that a heart rate between 50 and 100 is *defined* to be normal.

Definition which defines young physically active, fit persons with healthy
hearts as having "abnormal" resting heart rate is not satisfactory, IMHO.

Again, this is not a matter of opinion but one of definition.

Quoted message said:

Either one should reduce the lower limit of the overall range or, IMHO
preferably, have different ranges for different subpopulations.

You are not running things, Matti.

Quoted message said:

Perhaps
these different range definitions already exist, I wouldn't know about it?

Is this a rhetorical question?

Respectfully, you remain out of your league on many levels, Matti.

Humbly,

Andrew

--
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist
http://www.heartmdphd.com/