Tag Archives: Fight/Flight Event

And The Winner Is..

Vapor Lock by a wide margin. A lot of interesting contributions to include:

  • cranial crash
  • Brain Choke
  • Lizard State
  • hyperlock
  • Blankout
  • Neural Network Denial-of-Service Attack

The last one is great. However, I think the technically correct term would be “Parasympathetic Nervous System Allowing Denial-of-Service Acceleration!”

Thanks all for your votes. We’ve crowdsourced a term!

Sign up for the QuantXLaFont Newsletter
Get our lifestyle tips and studies delivered to your inbox.
Thank you! We don't spam :)

Reader Poll: Name that Freak Out State

I have prepared my speech for the Quantified Self 2015 Conference and have one last finishing touch to do and I thought I would reach out for your help. The speech is about stress states while interacting with colleagues. I have used many words in this blog to describe this stress state before to include terms like Upset and Parasympathetic Flatline. But these terms don’t capture those electrifying moments where things just freeze. Let’s name that freak out state.

Name that Freak Out State

What I am trying to describe is more specific in the social environment and the term needs a little punch. It is that state brought on by any trigger that puts your body in the Fight/Flight mode at that exact moment you actually need your brain. It is the moment when all your blood moves to the back brain, hands and feet getting you ready to physically respond to danger. And you are sitting in a conference room. It is freezing up when you talk to the boss. Going blank when you get on stage to speak to a group. Those terrifying moments when you can’t recall simple facts you know you have in your memory.

I would like to get your input on a good term that captures this state in a vibrant way. The term the group likes most I will use my in QS15 speech and will start using to describe this state hereafter. Let’s crowdsource a term and see if it sticks. To the poll:

Fort-Six Meditations

I was pulling data yesterday preparing my speech for the Quantified Self Conference & Expo. I have been collecting heart rate variability (HRV) readings since October during conversations with work colleagues. My hypothesis was that I could train myself to be like a conversational ninja and outwit people using my physiology.

ConvoNinja

I had to ensure I could bring myself to a relaxed state by practicing sitting in a meditative state each morning for five minutes. l talk about the value of this in my tutorial post “By Yourself – Basic Training.”  I wanted to train myself to get to calm in five minutes or less.

For these sessions, I use Heartmath emWave pro because it has a very clear interface. It uses an ear clip that ties to software on my laptop and this is the dashboard I see during the session:

Slide1

I can see my HRV wave on the top part of the screen and get a score on how I am doing on the bottom. I don’t recommend the emWave pro based on its high price. You can use a phone-based app for the same five-minute session. But I have one so I use it.

In prepping the speech, I pulled the data on 46 meditative sessions to see if I was getting fight/flight readings when I was purposely downshifting my physiology. These sessions were spread out over multiple months and consisted of 17,872 heart beats. I analyzed these beats looking for fight/flight incidents using a technique I outline in my HRV Tutorial. The number of fight/flight incidents?

bagel

That’s right, zero. Over all of those sessions, I did not have a single incident of extended fight/flight during those sessions. So I had in my Basic Training learned how to bring myself to a relaxed and refreshed state very consistently.

I’ll be talking how I wove this training into my conversational experiences as part of my speech for the conference. I’ll also be rehearsing this speech this Wednesday at the first Denver Quantified Self Meetup. If you are in the area stop on by.

Superpower Series: Variability Basic Training

Before you begin taking readings in work sessions and meetings you have to become familiar with the pattern and connection between your circumstances, Heart Rate Variability (HRV), and breath. Your breath rate signals to your nervous system whether your circumstance calls for an accelerated state, or a relaxed nervous state. Conducting repeated sessions will allow you to see the relationship.

Exercise: Using basic kit take a measurement each morning for five minutes. While doing so, breathe six times a minute. That means breath in five seconds and out for five seconds. You can start with a smaller period if you are uncomfortable  and need to practice. Even at smaller intervals make the breaths even and consistent. Afterward look at the intervals between heart beats to see how well your breath and HRV relate to each other.

If you are relaxed the measure of RR intervals will go up and down evenly with your breath. This means your Parasympathetic Nervous System (PNS) is applying the brake to put you in rest and digest state. Here is a graph of my RR intervals during a five minute session in a completely relaxed state:

Slide1

I have had many sessions where despite regular breathing I could not enter a relaxed state. Here is a session where I was thoughtful about a variety of to do’s while trying to bring myself to a relaxed state. These Upsets were evident in the graph of my RR intervals:
Slide2

You can see in the intervals have periods where there is not much variability. My thought process was accelerating my Sympathetic Nervous System even though I was sitting quietly breathing in a regular rhythm. In another session I was generally relaxed and in the zone then had a thought that interrupted my flow. I let the through go and returned to breathing and recaptured my variability. You can see the interruption and return in the red circle.

Slide3

In another session on two occasions I had Upsets in the flow of the session and was able to recover twice. You can see these episodes in the red circles in this chart.

Slide4

The exercise of breathing regularly and taking your HRV measurement for five minutes a day will give you a baseline for when your system is Upset by different thoughts, and when it is responding to your breath while relaxed.

If you want to learn more about developing a Superpower read about Giving a Speech.

Why Apple Watch Will Not Be Accurate on Stress Readings

With the imminent launch of the Apple Watch it is clear that everyone is looking to it for new functionality and inevitably there will be claims you can reduce stress using it. I wanted to look into whether the device could reliably deliver on that promise.

Apple Watch Will Not Be Accurate

The watch reportedly can read heart rate by taking pulse readings from the wrist using pulse oximetry, a method that uses light pulses to read heart beats by measuring the change in skin color due to different levels of blood flow. Pulse oximetry is refined enough for reading heart rate, but Heart Rate Variability (HRV) demands precision that pulse oximetry reportedly cannot deliver.

I am interested in using HRV to improve personal performance in working sessions, face to face meetings, negotiations and public speaking. I thought it would be interesting to be able to use an Apple Watch to read HRV and improve those skills. So I wanted to test pulse oximetry myself.
Apple Watch Will Not Be Accurate

I don’t have an Apple Watch, so I connected a Mio Velo wrist worn band to the SweetbeatLife app on an iPhone. The Mio product claims to deliver “EKG-accurate heart rate data” and uses pulse oximetry, so this would be my proxy for an Apple Watch.

Apple Watch Will Not Be Accurate

To compare this setup with readings from electrical signals I connected a Polar H7 to Marco Altini’s Heart Rate Variability Logger on an iPod Touch. This would allow me to take two readings of a single heart beat and compare the methods. After wrangling settings and conflicting signalling I got them both to work.

My goal was to use my Parasympathetic Flatline method when comparing the pulse oximetry with electrical readings using a heart rate belt. This means I am looking for 10 consecutive heart beat intervals that vary less than 17 milliseconds from beat to beat. When I find these strings of beats I am measuring myself in a fight/flight state.

Researching pulse oximetry I found a research paper that said that physical movement introduced errors in readings making pulse oximetry unreliable for measuring HRV when subjects were in motion. The conclusion was that pulse oximetry “is unlikely to prove a practical alternative to the ECG in ambulatory recordings or recordings made during other activities.”

Apple Watch Will Not Be Accurate

My interest is looking at activities like negotiating, meeting and coding where there is not a lot of physical movement. With the study providing some potential for pulse oximetry to provide some value to my area of interest, it seemed reasonable that readings when relaxed would be similar and when walking very different.

I conducted sessions in a relaxed state, working by myself on the computer, in meetings and while walking. I first conducted the dual measurements while in a relaxed state for ten minutes. I sat and did not move and breathed in an even rhythm. Subjectively I think I was in fight/flight for 25% of the time because sitting motionless allowed me to think about all the things I was not getting done. Here is a graph of the two readings:

Apple Watch Will Not Be Accurate

The pulse oximetry reading was that I was in fight/flight 87% of the time and that is way overstated. The P7 said 32% and that was much closer to my experience. So the relaxed state had a completely different outcome than my hypothesis.

Next I measured myself when I was in a working session, which meant I had structured some time to work on my computer without interruption. I was working on some recruiting matters which meant screening resumes. It was very focused work and I felt relaxed. I would have said I was 10% at most in fight/flight. My session was 16 minutes long, and here are the charts:

Apple Watch Will Not Be Accurate

The pulse oximetry reading said I was in fight/flight 57% of the time. This did not remotely match my experience. The H7 reading said I experienced no fight/flight at all. There were accelerations, but none that were more than 9 beats. So though I’m not sure it was a perfect session it was clear that the H7 more closely matched my experience.

I also took readings during the first and second half of a long staff meeting. I was not the host, I was a participant. There were some controversial things being discussed so I would have subjectively said I was in fight/flight 15% of the time. Here is the chart for the first half of the meeting:

Apple Watch Will Not Be Accurate

You can see the pulse oximetry said I was at 62% fight/flight, H7 10%. Here is the chart for the second half:

Apple Watch Will Not Be Accurate

Pulse Oximetry had me at 63% and H7 at 1%. The H7 seemed low because there were a few moments where I was definitely in a heightened state, but an average under 10% is much close to the perceived 15% than a consistent reading by the Apple Watch equivalent of over 60%. That just made no sense.

I took measurements while walking. I had low expectations because I had taken readings when exercising and know that HRV is low when physically active. Here is the chart as I took my first walk to the train from work.

Apple Watch Will Not Be Accurate

I walk briskly so I expected a 60% to 75% reading here. What you see is Oximetry at 91% and H7 at 67%. Again oximetry was high. Here is my reading for leaving the train and going to the pickup point:

Apple Watch Will Not Be Accurate

What is interesting here is my wife picked me up about a third of the way through the reading and I relaxed in the car chatting with her as she drove me home. The H7 clearly shows me moving from an accelerated state to more relaxed, which was my experience. The oximetry reading shows continued stress. Again the H7 reading matched the experience.

So what conclusion can we draw from comparing pulse oximetry as used by Apple Watch to electrical readings from chest worn heart rate belts? In the range of activity from sitting motionless to walking briskly the pulse oximetry method overstates stress.

So your Apple Watch is not the best tool to measure stress response using HRV. When you read, “Physicians and digital health experts are encouraged by the level of accuracy suggested by the Apple Watch’s sensors,” remember that pulse oximetry will overstate your stress. In a world of stress the last thing you need is to have it overstated.

Parasympathetic Flatline Talking versus Listening

I wanted to look at how often I entered the Parasympathetic Flatline while in a 1:1 conversation with a colleague by phone. For the discussion I read by heart beat intervals using a Polar H7 heart rate belt and the Heart Rate Variability Logger app for iOS. I also recorded my side of the meeting on a smart phone. When the meeting was complete I downloaded my heart beat intervals via csv file and pulled them into excel. Once in excel I used a formula mechanism I created that graphs segments where more than 10 consecutive interbeat intervals are less than 17 milliseconds apart.

During the 60 minutes session I measured 4,451 heart beats and the intervals between them. Of those intervals, 14% were in groups of consecutive intervals that were close together, meaning during 14% of the meeting I was in what I call Parasympathetic Flatline. This measured the periods where I was in fight/flight mode during the discussion.

Here is a vizualization of the meeting:

Slide1

In the session the forty-seven stress events triggered. Of these, 22 of 47 occurred when I was talking and presenting information to my colleague. 25, or 53%, occurred when I was listening to my colleague.  When listening to the recording, it is clear that the stress event, even when occurring when I am talking, begin when I was no agreeing with my colleagues response or trying to move him to a different position. The stress response was a result of not liking the direction the conversation was going.

Again physiology has shown that anticipating and trying to shape another person’t response is the source of stress in a 1:1 interaction. I once thought presenting my own opinion was a source of stress but that has turned out not to be the case. The stress, it appears, is not agreeing with someone else presenting their opinion.

Added clarification: From Twitter, fellow QS’er Gustavo (@GGlusman) asked the percentage of time I was talking versus not. Pushed by the question I went back beat by beat and looked at the session. As I reported above 736 beats were “in stress ” meaning that those beats were in a grouping with more than ten beats that occurred with a difference in beat interval less in 17 milliseconds to the adjacent beat. Of those beats in stress, I found that 238 were while I was talking and the remainder while listening. So that means 38.5% of the stress beats occurred while I was talking, 61.5% while I was listening. Impatience while listening was clearly more stress creating than flapping my gums. Thanks to Gustavo for asking the clarifying question!

Using the Parasympathetic Flatline

Using the Parasympathetic Flatline I analyzed a discussion with a colleague. I was following up on a topic that was not controversial. We had discussed this topic about a month prior. The colleague and I get along in a positive way.  So this should have been a relatively stress free and short meeting.

I used Marco Altini’s Heart Rate Variability Logger and a Polar H7 heart rate monitor to gather the base data while recording the meeting with my smart phone. Pulling that data into a spreadsheet I used my Parasympathetic Flatline model to determine at what point in the meeting I was experiencing physiological stress. I pulled the recording, the heart rate variability readings and the transcript into a timeline graph.

Slide1

What we see here is when I talked (green), when my colleague talked (blue) and when I was experiencing a physiological event of what I call Parasympathetic Flatline (red), or stress. There are specific points in the discussion when I was amped up, but they were not what I expected.

I had a hypothesis that I was entering these states when I was putting myself “out there,” however I had one moment about 3/4 of the way through the meeting where I really pushed the boundary of a sensitive topic but I did not experience stress. I was synched with my colleague and the discussion did not trigger stress at that point.

There were four points in the discussion, however, that I entered a heightened state when I wanted the conversation to go in a different direction. My agenda was not being followed. In the first two, early in the conversation, I wanted to hear the answer to the question more directly. I was impatient. In the second two, I had the information I needed and wanted to wrap up.

It appears that difficult topics are not stress inducing when discussing them with a colleague when we are in synch, but my overall judgements about the progress of the discussion seem to trigger an aroused state. It is our judgements about the situation that may be the source of stress.

Testing the Parasympathetic Flatline

Last week I proposed measuring a Parasympathetic Flatline (PS Flatline) where at least ten successive heart beat intervals were close together. This differs from using 30 second averages for rMSSD, a time based measure of average intervals. I wanted to to a side by side comparison to see which of these methods more accurately could point me to moments when I triggered a shutdown of my Parasympathetic Nervous System which allowed the fight or flight reaction to run things.

I measured several meetings where I was able to audio record the proceedings while measuring my heart rate. I used my Android phone to record the audio, a Polar H7 heart rate belt to pick up my heart rate and Marco Altini’s Heart Rate Variability Logger to capture the data. Afterward, I downloaded the csv files for both the rr intervals and the 30 second rMSSD.

The meeting was 55 minutes long and included one person in the room with me and one person on the phone. We were discussing a topic I was comfortable with and an activity I had experience doing. I was briefing my colleagues on a time schedule and details. I was in a relaxed state going into the meeting and did a short two minute breathing reset using BreatheSync prior to the meeting.

In previous studies I had determined that a 30 second rMSSD under 48 was probably a stress state. I had used several stress events to create this baseline. When looking at this meeting, however, I was disappointed to see that using this method definitely overstated the number of stress states. The graph below shows blue bars where I had a 30 second rMSSD under 48 and you can see it shows I was in that state for much of the meeting.

Slide1

This was not my experience of the meeting. I had the facts to hand, we had a good discussion and overall it was a friendly, informative discussion. So the 30 second rMSSD had not done the job for this meeting. I then looked at the PS Flatline that would show when my beat to beat intervals were less than 17 milliseconds for 10 consecutive beats. Here is what the meeting looked like using the PS Flatline.

Slide2

Listening to the audio I could definitely see that this method caught moments that had me shifting into high gear. I chose this meeting because there was a point at the fifteen minute mark where my information was completely wrong and I felt the flush of embarrassment. This came through accurately in the chart. It also showed several moments where I was trying to calculate sums with an audience and I needed to shift into gear and focus. You can see on the chart different elements of the meeting I heard in the audio and my memory of what was happening.

So the PS Flatline approach seems to be much more accurate though I have to do further analysis on other meetings to ensure it is catching all of the stress trigger events. I have 10 additional meetings recorded with audio and HRV so i will start crunching those number next.

My Quantified Self 2014 in Review

I had a good Quantified Self year this year. As a long time logger and casual athlete I have always logged my personal data in some form. This year with the support of the Quantified Self community I was able to explore two specific areas. First, I moved stress tracking from self reporting to the use of wearable devices. Though I bought a few more devices than I would have liked I found that heart rate variability measurements using $65 worth of equipment was sufficient to track stress. Second, I was able to pull out insights about consciousness and heart rate variability that set the stage for future studies.

I explored 20 ideas this year that I organized into five umbrella studies. I started looking at the data I had collected through self reporting of “Upset Events.” I followed that up with a look at Upset intensity given different situations. After seeing the limits of self reporting I started using different devices to measure stress, settling on Heartmath used during working session. Using the device I discovered Freakback can have an effect on results. After learning how to work through that I completed a first study on how I recovered from Upsets.

As I was conducting these studies I had an emerging idea that emotion is navigation. The regularity of emotional shifts seemed like “sighting” as I worked through different ideas. As I worked on this idea I found that Heartmath was too limited in what it measures. Heart Rate Variability has a more direct measurement in rMSSD. I dropped Heartmath and started using Sweetwater HRV’s SweetbeatLife to monitor rMSSD. Using this tool I started measuring stressful events like getting a tooth drilled and firing a shotgun. I played with machine learning and straight statistical regression and determined my “stress point” when read by rMSSD. This provides me a tool to study a variety of situations going forward.

Along the way I gave five Quantied Self meetup talks, 2 in London, 1 in Amsterdam and 2 in the Bay Area. In London and Amsterdam I did my talk We Never Fight on Wednesdays, and in London my followup Don’t Just Stand There. In the Bay Area I presented my talk Every Other Minute where I talked about the navigation impulse. And finally my Bay Area presentation on heart rate variability and Flow. These talks went well and I am set up to give a presentation at the QS Global conference (QS15) in June.

Some of the 20 ideas did not pan out. My work on 800 numbers went nowhere. Ideas about reading my heart rate while doing The Work by Byron Katie did not have sufficient detail to be interesting. Several other ideas blew up on the launchpad. However, I’m pleased with the progress this year. In my next post I will talk about the lessons I have learned during this work.

Managing Imagination

Since April of 2014 I have been posting my findings here as part of a systematic way to understand and mitigate Upsets. I logged Upsets as they occurred, measured my heart rate variability during periods of stress and connected types of Upsets to different types of thought.

The first real insight that came from self reporting Upsets was that the majority of them were Self Induced and of those the majority were anticipating future negative events. The fundamental tool we have which is the ability to imagine a future scenario is the source of most of the stress – thoughts that anticipate a negative future outcome.

Another insight is the volume of thought. Thinking I was capturing a high number of Upsets in my reporting was completely blown apart by watching how often my physiology altered based on thought. Was looked at the beginning to be a 5 to 8 time a day volume was actually up to 450 thoughts a day that could potentially cause Upset. And that volume is constant. So any plan that includes eliminating thought is irrelevant. The plan must be based in how I respond to Upsets.

Looking at the lessons learned the core skill to develop is managing imagination. Imagination is our engine of progress, it shows us what is possible. It is also the source of what we believe are our misfires, misalignments and Upsets. Believing too much in imagination immerses us in our miserable misfires. Completely eradicating imagination robs us of our ability to be motivated, plan and progress. Somehow we have to find a middle ground of practical imagination, a place where we see what is inspiring and possible while knowing when to discount those scenarios that are impossibly negative and exaggerated.