Decent compression of morbidity formula

[tareload]

Playing around with reasonable equation to track over time...

Fitness score = [age / (max BP for 5 reps in lb)] x 20 + 1 mile run time in min

Lower score is better

Example for fit 50 year old:

50 / 315 x 20 + 7.5 = 10.7

Example for not so fit 50 year old

50 / 100 × 20 + 15 = 25

Obviously lots of variants. You could sub squats or another strength metric and bike time instead of rub. Just wanted to capture strength and vo2max components along with implicit body weight penalty since you gotta move that weight for the mile.

I always find these types of competing formulas fascinating and difficult. Hence the whole CrossFit challenge.


Could come up with decent score intervals based on age.

Now that I think of it I should switch numerator and denominator. More later ...

Serves me right for typing this up before fleshing out properly. But another thread with @BadassBlues got me thinking about this again.

 

[BadassBlues]

Playing around with reasonable equation to track over time...

Fitness score = [age / (max BP for 5 reps in lb)] x 20 + 1 mile run time in min

Lower score is better

Example for fit 50 year old:

50 / 315 x 20 + 7.5 = 10.7

Example for not so fit 50 year old

50 / 100 × 20 + 15 = 25

Obviously lots of variants. You could sub squats or another strength metric and bike time instead of rub. Just wanted to capture strength and vo2max components along with implicit body weight penalty since you gotta move that weight for the mile.

I always find these types of competing formulas fascinating and difficult. Hence the whole CrossFit challenge.


Could come up with decent score intervals based on age.

Now that I think of it I should switch numerator and denominator. More later ...

Peter Attia recommends the farmer walk.

 

[BigTex]

We use the following tests in my classes:

1 mile Rockport Walk test - VO MAX
pushups ('till failure) - upper body endurance
crunches ('till failure) - core endurance
BF (bio-impedance)

VO2 max = 132.853 - (0.0769 x your weight in pounds) - (0.3877 x your age) + (6.315 if you are male or 0 if you are female) - (3.2649 x your walking time) - (0.1565 x your heart rate at the end of the test)

or

https://exrx.net/Calculators/Rockport

We have maybe 5 years worth the data on students and have show in 16 week, 8 week and 6 week classes tremendous improvement from baseline. Most of my students get the best improvements just doing weight training.

 

[SteveCleves]

Very interesting.

I think there is tremendous value in an individual knowing their "score" and using it as metric to improve. I am not really sure what a number like this actually translates too in terms of real all cause mortality. (not saying that's what you're trying to do)

I think for the strength test you need to calculate it in reference to body weight somehow.
A 50yo that weighs 225 that can bench 225 for 5 I would bet has a lower morbidity than a 30yo who weighs 300 and does 315 for 5. Although maybe the 1min mile time accounts for that.

 

[TLR]

As I near 54 I’m interested in this type of thing….in fairness to myself I can say without reservation I’m in better physical / metabolic shape than most folks my age and still put the work in….however, I’m at the stage where if I “go for broke” trying to test myself the margin for error on injury is greater (and unnecessary). I have to remind myself at times I’m not getting paid to do this, so I always try to leave a little in the tank.

 

[SteveCleves]

Serves me right for typing this up before fleshing out properly. But another thread with @BadassBlues got me thinking about this again.

Not at all, this is good stuff. And given your shown expertise with statistical analysis like this I am really really interested to see where you go with this. I love the "thinking out loud" aspect too.

 

[tareload]

We use the following tests in my classes:

1 mile Rockport Walk test - VO MAX
pushups ('till failure) - upper body endurance
crunches ('till failure) - core endurance
BF (bio-impedance)

VO2 max = 132.853 - (0.0769 x your weight in pounds) - (0.3877 x your age) + (6.315 if you are male or 0 if you are female) - (3.2649 x your walking time) - (0.1565 x your heart rate at the end of the test)

or

https://exrx.net/Calculators/Rockport

We have maybe 5 years worth the data on students and have show in 16 week, 8 week and 6 week classes tremendous improvement from baseline. Most of my students get the best improvements just doing weight training.

Hey thanks for sharing this @BigTex. Much more appropriate testing as folks get older (lower force on knees with walking vs running). And the point raised above to minimize potential harm during testing is a great one.

 

[tareload]

Very interesting.

I think there is tremendous value in an individual knowing their "score" and using it as metric to improve. I am not really sure what a number like this actually translates too in terms of real all cause mortality. (not saying that's what you're trying to do)

I think for the strength test you need to calculate it in reference to body weight somehow.
A 50yo that weighs 225 that can bench 225 for 5 I would bet has a lower morbidity than a 30yo who weighs 300 and does 315 for 5. Although maybe the 1min mile time accounts for that.

Great points. The extremely fit older person may die of sudden cardiac arrest but their compression of morbidity will be awesome LOL. U shaped as most things I presume. So I am neglecting mortality.

Yeah I was trying to capture the bodyweight component in the mile time. A 300 lb man who can run 7 min mile...God Bless Him!

Hence was playing around with some strength component, age, and a cardiovascular fitness input. The weight takes care of itself via the cardio score unless the subject is a mutant 400 lb man who can run a 7 min mile.

For years I have tried this simple test....

315 for 5 on bench press
6 min mile by foot

Never could do both at the same bodyweight and within the same week or month.

To @TLR 's point, after running into AFIB a couple years ago I still ain't rushing out to train for conquering that right now haha.

 

[tareload]

As I near 54 I’m interested in this type of thing….in fairness to myself I can say without reservation I’m in better physical / metabolic shape than most folks my age and still put the work in….however, I’m at the stage where if I “go for broke” trying to test myself the margin for error on injury is greater (and unnecessary). I have to remind myself at times I’m not getting paid to do this, so I always try to leave a little in the tank.

This is awesome point and I am on the fence with this myself. There have been two incidents that happened to me in last year that could have gone really bad without base level of fitness. So while you don't want to go nuts and stupidly injure yourself it seems there is a decent and calculated risk of some injury you gotta put up in order to achieve that desired fitness level. Individual call without going full Ronnie Coleman mode. And arrythmia and AFIB is common for older endurance junkies.

Thanks for your awesome point.

 

[BigTex]

Hey thanks for sharing this @BigTex. Much more appropriate testing as folks get older (lower force on knees with walking vs running). And the point raised above to minimize potential harm during testing is a great one.

Thanks, I deal with a lot of non-kinesiology majors and most are in minimal shape. This is the easiest way to test without having to worry about too much stress. I use to have them go outside and walk a mile but during the summer and beginning of the fall semester its just to hot. I don't want to have heat problem and have to call 911. We have about 20 treadmills in our fitness center so its much easier to do it in the air conditioning.