The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
I have somebody who's got an H or you know an HRV of you know 110 to use your example or whatever and then I have someone who's got V2 Max I know is I don't know 70 I can pretty well know that person with a V2 Max of 70 is pretty aerobically fit and they've lived a pretty solid lifestyle and had done the the work and the training to to get that level I'm more confident
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
you should worry more about your V2 Max because you have more control over it and it's a better predictor of all cause mortality
but we definitely know that we can increase our AGB or we can at least prevent the decline most effectively through cardiovascular fitness we see people with higher V2s have higher mitochondrial function they have higher V2 that leads to or at least correlates with greater HRV so we know that cardiovascular fitness in general seems to be the most closely tied to average HRV