Linq loop recorder

Just got the linq recorder taken out friday. I had it for 2 1/2 years to try and diagnose unexplaned fainting it didnt pick up anything so I decide to have it out but now Im kinda regretting it. So was wondering if anybody has a smart watch that records hr. Like does anyone have the apple watch series 4 i heard its fda approved?


6 Comments

Apple watch

by Tracey_E - 2019-01-06 18:38:23

I have the series 4 and it's pretty darned accurate. It can be set to let you know if your heart rate drops below a given point. It works with an app called Cardiogram.

edited to add I don't have that turned on so have no experience with the alarm. With the pacer it would be impossible for me to set it off because my rate will never drop. It's been great helping me figure out running intervals that keep my average heart rate in a good range. 

HR monitor

by ar_vin - 2019-01-06 21:52:57

If you're looking for a HR monitor, I'd suggest staying away from the wrist worn watches as they tend not to be as accurate as the chest strap HR monitors. A decent compromise are the optical arm band HR monitors - almost as accurate as the chest worn straps but much more comfortable.

Check out the Scosche Rhythm24 - I personally have used it now for several months and find it very accurate and comfortable for extended use. I often do 4+ hour hikes and like to monitor my heart rate; as I get back in shape post PM I'll also start doing 4+ hour runs so looking forward to using it more. It's also great to wear to bed and wear while asleep overnight to get HR data while asleep.

Polar and Wahoo also make armband monitors but the Scosche Rhythm24 has the best features currently.

Check out reviews at:

https://www.dcrainmaker.com/2018/01/scosches-rhythm-24-optical-hr-sensor.html

https://www.dcrainmaker.com/2017/09/hands-on-polars-oh1-standalone-optical-hr-sensor.html

 

And more......

 

 

 

arm vs wrist

by Tracey_E - 2019-01-07 08:21:15

Arm monitors are more accurate but intended for workout only. Watches are for all the time.

Arm vs Wrist

by ar_vin - 2019-01-07 19:25:47

"Arm monitors are more accurate but intended for workout only. Watches are for all the time."

Not true at all! The Scosche Rhythm24 (among others) has a battery that will last over 24 hours. It can display the heart rate data or record heart rate and store the data onboard for the entire time for later analysis.

I suggest you please read the reviews at the URL posted above to understand the features.

It's just a fact of human anatomy: we have more arteries in the upper arm and fore arm than on the wrist - this makes it much easier for the optical heart monitors to get blood flow data. The heart rate (and soon blood pressure) is measured by monitoring arterial blood flow.

Here's a great graphic showing the various locations on the body where blood flow data can be used:

https://valencell.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/OHRM-body-location-diagram.pdf

 

From Valencell a leader in the optical HR monitoring business.

 

 

 

arm vs wrist

by Tracey_E - 2019-01-08 09:11:49

I wasn't trying to say the arm bands wouldn't work, just that for someone intending to wear it as an alarm around the clock long term, a watch is a lot more practical and comfortable. I was talking patient comfort pov, not effectiveness of the technology. 

arm vs wrist

by ar_vin - 2019-01-08 13:15:46

Yes we're both talking about the same thing Tracey!

I happen to have tried all three for several months each: chest strap, wrist worn and forearm/upper arm HR monitors. Most people (including me) find the forearm/upper arm bands much more comfortable than the chest strap and the wrist worn.

 

You know you're wired when...

You have rhythm.

Member Quotes

I feel so incredibly thankful that I can continue to live my life.