Most Vo2 tables I see online (or used by so-called “longevity doctors” and “longevity clinics”) either are total garbage without sources, or cite American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) books from 20y ago, or do not differentiate between cycle ergometer and treadmill.
The paper’s author is Leonard A. Kaminsky, also editor of the ACSM books.
First, it’s essential to know that “The treadmill-determined CRF was an average of 22%, 4.5 mLO2·kg-1·min-1 higher than the CRF determined from a cycle ergometer CPX.”
Then, the table (data from the above paper, that I copied to Wikipedia, hence the different look):
Thank you for posting this. I have a question, though, on yhe difference between the values for treadmill versus cycling. Are these actual differences in VO2max, or just differences in “measured” values? I had thought VO2max was an “absolute” quantity that measures the max volume of oxygen you can process (ie metabolize) when exerting? This should be independent of the actual exercise, right? So regardless of type of exercise, the max volume should asymptote at the same value if you are at max exertion for a period, right?
That’s the way I understand it. If you have your VO2 max tested properly (not a watch or app), your VO2 max is your VO2 max regardless of what type of exercise you were doing while the measurements were taken. The exercise must be intense enough to reach your true max heart rate.
The VO2 max does not only depends on the cardiac output but also on the transport and use of the oxygen. That’s why you need to be sure you are well warmed-up before the measurement so that the capillaries are dilated, your mitochondria primed and the fuel readily available.
Then the more muscles you use during the exercise the more oxygen you can consume which is why your running VO2max will be higher than the cycling one and the highest VO2max is in cross-country skiers.
World-class (WC) cross-country skiers exhibit some of the highest maximal oxygen uptake (V˙O2max) values ever reported, i.e., >80 and >70 mL·min−1·kg−1 for men and women, respectively
That’s a good explanation. But if i take this further, is the “cycling VO2max” not really a measure of max (or isn’t far enough up on the asymptote to find the “true” max) because it doesn’t use enough muscle stimulation ?
Or said another way: shouldn’t the “max” VO2max from cycling be scaled up via a constant to approach the “true” VO2max?
V̇O2 max (also maximal oxygen consumption, maximal oxygen uptake or maximal aerobic capacity) is the maximum rate of oxygen consumption attainable during physical exertion.[1][2] The name is derived from three abbreviations: “V̇” for volume (the dot over the V indicates “per unit of time” in Newton’s notation), “O2” for oxygen, and “max” for maximum and usually normalized per kilogram of body mass. A similar measure is V̇O2 peak (peak oxygen consumption), which is the measurable value from a session of physical exercise, be it incremental or otherwise. It could match or underestimate the actual V̇O2 max. Confusion between the values in older and popular fitness literature is common.
V̇O2 max is measured during a cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPX test). The test is done on a treadmill or cycle ergometer. In untrained subjects, V̇O2 max is 10% to 20% lower when using a cycle ergometer compared with a treadmill. However, trained cyclists’ results on the cycle ergometer are equal to or even higher than those obtained on the treadmill.
So the above table actually shows Vo2 peak (it’s named in the paper: “CRF Percentiles for the FRIEND Cohort by Age Group for Treadmill and Cycle Ergometer CPX With Directly Measured VO2peak (mLO2·kg-1·min-1) Using an Inclusion Criterion of RER ≥ 1.0a”.
My own conclusion: you can only measure Vo2 peak, which is inferior or equal to Vo2 max. To best approximate your Vo2 max when measuring your Vo2 peak you need to use a device you’re most used to (e.g., if you prefer running => treadmill), be well warmed up, etc. to be in the best possible conditions.
You can test your VO2 max with 90% accuracy without labs, by doing the Cooper Test. You run on a track for 12 minutes, then measure how far you ran, then refer to the chart.
Kenneth Cooper MD is the author of the book Aerobics.
The Cooper Test is an excellent fitness standard and a highly reliable health measurement. Learn how to find your pace and run your best time!
The Cooper Institute tested tens of thousands of participants and developed fitness performance standards beginning in 1968 that continue to be used today in the military, law enforcement, and pro sports. To see how you measure up, here are 1.5-mile run standards for the Navy Seals and FBI, with age group standards for men and women from the Cooper Institute.
You can also calculate your VO2 max with the equation below:
The Cooper 12 minute run is a popular maximal running test of aerobic fitness, in which participants try and cover as much distance as they can in 12 minutes. purpose: to test aerobic fitness (the ability of the body to use oxygen to power it while…
Est. reading time: 2 minutes
VO2max = (35.97 x miles) – 11.29
VO2max = (22.35 x kilometers) – 11.29
How to conduct the test
This test requires the athlete to swim 400m and, following a rest, 50m as fast as possible
The athlete warms up for 10 minutes
This part of the test requires the athlete to swim 400 metres
The athlete gets into the pool
The assistant gives the command “GO”, starts the stopwatch, and the athlete commences the test
The assistant stops the stopwatch and records the time when the athlete completes the 400m (T2)
The athlete has an active 10-minute recovery
This part of the test requires the athlete to swim 50 metres
The athlete gets into the pool
The assistant gives the command “GO” starts the stopwatch, and the athlete commences the test
The assistant stops the stopwatch and records the time when the athlete completes the 50m (T1)
Assessment
I have been unable to locate any normative data for this test.
Calculation of CSS
CSS = (D2 - D1) ÷ (T2 - T1)
Where D1 = 50, D2 = 400, T1 = time for 50 metres in seconds and T2 = time for 400 metres in seconds
Plug in the values into the calculator on the page.
Despite significant associations between exercise-based prediction equations and directly measured CRF, the equations had a low degree of accuracy in categorizing participants into fitness tertiles, a key requirement when stratifying risk within a clinical setting. The present analysis highlights the limited accuracy of exercise-based determinations of eCRF and suggests the need to include cardiopulmonary measures with maximal exercise to accurately assess CRF within a clinical setting.
This paper is actually cited by Kaminsky et al. They comment:
Additionally, many studies investigating CRF as a key outcome measure have used estimates of CRF, with a range of different methods for deriving the estimate. As there is known error when estimating CRF, and the error varies depending on the method, this provided further challenges to interpreting CRF values.
So equations and smartphone-based estimates (which use similar equations) are nice, but it seems that they cannot replace a proper test in clinic.
“Vo2max” is the lesser of O2 captured and distributed or O2 used. Either can be the limiter. The more muscles used the more O2 used. The more you are willing to suffer the more O2 you can burn.
All of this says to me that the exact number is not worth the effort of being precise. What matters is that your number isn’t low, in my opinion.
So, what doesn’t the chart tell you that you need to know to improve your health and longevity? If your vo2max (from wherever you got it) says 20, and the chart says 50th percentile is 23.3-24.6 depending on what type of exercise…then get it higher. If your vo2max is 40, you are good, and focus on improving something else.
I won’t bother to get my vo2max measured. It’s good enough. I keep it in a good range without knowing the number.
So yes, you mostly don’t want to be in the low (<25th percentile) performance group (“stratified by age- and sex-matched” in the paper).
For that, I understand that you need to 1/ Measure Vo2 max in a clinic and 2/ Know the percentiles (and especially the 25% one) for your gender, age group, and exercise modality.
That paper gives the following table for peak estimated metabolic equivalents on treadmill testing (multiply by 3.5 to get Vo2max?):
(In any case, whatever your gender, age, and modality of exercise, Vo2 max > 38 mL/(kg·min) is always above the “low (<25th percentile)” performance group, and Vo2 max > 47 mL/(kg·min) is always above average.)
I feel like this is opening a can of worms, and there are lots of confounding factors. I’d like to see a mendelian randomization study on VO2 max specifically, with genes that aren’t in the brain, for example, to avoid pleiotropy with exercise activity. Like being in lungs or blood cells or something. I’m sure there are drugs that increase VO2 Max now or on in the future. Would such a drug be a healthspan drug?
You are accurately understanding the details involved, as far as I can tell. The question is how much accuracy is necessary. I do not think I need to go to a lab to have my vo2max measured. I can just go on a group bike ride to find out how I am doing. If I can hang (year after year) with a group of my peers, I’m doing well enough. If I had an Apple Watch and it said my vo2max was low, I wouldn’t believe it.
My thinking is I just need to have a solid level of cardio fitness and then keep it up over the years. If I am doing that, then I should invest my time and money elsewhere to my health and longevity.
Yes, based on your photo, I’m sure your Vo2 max is fine But for those who have never exercised regularly and/or are starting their “longevity” journey, I think it’s worth measuring Vo2 max once. Anyway, I measured mine this morning in a clinic, 50.8 mg/kg/min on a bike, all good.
I think it’s better to know both the running/cycling VO2max values because each one tells you where you are in terms of performance in running and cycling.
For that reason you can’t have a fixed ratio for running/cycling VO2max because you could be very well trained in one or the other (or both!) sport and that would impact that ratio quite significantly.
BTW Garmin manages both running/cycling VO2max values. As you can see I’m much more of a runner than a cyclist.
But for those who have never exercised regularly and/or are starting their “longevity” journey, I think it’s worth measuring Vo2 max once. Anyway, I measured mine this morning in a clinic, 50.8 mg/kg/min on a bike, all good.