▲ 590 ▼ WiFi signals can measure heart rate—no wearables needed (news.ucsc.edu) submitted 1 year ago by RegularJoe@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world 107 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] Mac@mander.xyz 3 points 1 year ago (3 children) That's quite high. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [+] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world -8 points 1 year ago (2 children) 90 is damn near perfect for most adults. It's a little high for children, but even for most teens that would be right in the middle of "the green zone." My resting heart rate of 60 is way too low especially combined with my regular blood pressure of 100/50 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] AlecSadler@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 1 year ago Hm I'm not sure I'd say it's perfect? I thought 70-80 was? My cardiologist said it isn't really "danger zone", but if it were like 100+ it might be concerning. I have had all the scans done, including a close look at my hearteries, and everything came back (surprisingly) clean. permalink fedilink source parent [–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 1 point 1 year ago 90 is poor health health. 72 is average, but that is also poor. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world -8 points 1 year ago (2 children) 90 is damn near perfect for most adults. It's a little high for children, but even for most teens that would be right in the middle of "the green zone." My resting heart rate of 60 is way too low especially combined with my regular blood pressure of 100/50 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] AlecSadler@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 1 year ago Hm I'm not sure I'd say it's perfect? I thought 70-80 was? My cardiologist said it isn't really "danger zone", but if it were like 100+ it might be concerning. I have had all the scans done, including a close look at my hearteries, and everything came back (surprisingly) clean. permalink fedilink source parent [–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 1 point 1 year ago 90 is poor health health. 72 is average, but that is also poor. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] AlecSadler@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 1 year ago Hm I'm not sure I'd say it's perfect? I thought 70-80 was? My cardiologist said it isn't really "danger zone", but if it were like 100+ it might be concerning. I have had all the scans done, including a close look at my hearteries, and everything came back (surprisingly) clean. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 1 point 1 year ago 90 is poor health health. 72 is average, but that is also poor. permalink fedilink source parent