fev1 related to differing levels of lung functioning

bagged2drag

Active member
I think the matter of severity of cf needs to be based off much more than FEV1. The FEV1 factor in severity is strictly based off lung function (by means of volume). The problem is, it doesn't account for the transfer of oxygen, as well as the overall cardiovascular shape a person is in. One can have decent clinical lung function (say in the 70's or 80's) yet not feel well or cope with the damage because they are not able to transfer oxygen efficiently (low sats). The next person can have an FEV1 of 35, be considered to be a severe case, and feel relatively well because they have less infection or are in better cardiovascular health and transfer oxygen well (mid 90's or higher). I think a formula should be made that combines both factors of FEV1 and oxygen saturation. I think part of the reason they don't use a formula though is that FEV1 is not very likely to increase (dramatically) while a person can increase their O2 sats through cardio training and exercise.

In my case, I feel quite well with an average FEV1 of about 35%. I am not in the best shape, but I am on my feet for 10+ hours a day walking around. This wasn't always the case though. A number of years back, after being extremely sick for a long time, my FEV1 was only around 20%, my O2 sats had a hard time getting above 87%. I eventually got both numbers back up, but when I would exercise or do anything strenuous (after being so inactive from being sick), my sats would still drop fast even though resting they were around 93%. Now, about 8 years later, this no longer happens. My FEV1 has been plateaued for the last number of years, generally around the 35%, my sats are 92-96% average (laying down/upright) and I am quite active in my job. Clinically I am still severe, but I am more in shape and feel much better. I still don't work out though, and I should.

As the doctors say, it is truly important to work out and get adequate exercise, even if it does make you feel crappy.
 

bagged2drag

Active member
I think the matter of severity of cf needs to be based off much more than FEV1. The FEV1 factor in severity is strictly based off lung function (by means of volume). The problem is, it doesn't account for the transfer of oxygen, as well as the overall cardiovascular shape a person is in. One can have decent clinical lung function (say in the 70's or 80's) yet not feel well or cope with the damage because they are not able to transfer oxygen efficiently (low sats). The next person can have an FEV1 of 35, be considered to be a severe case, and feel relatively well because they have less infection or are in better cardiovascular health and transfer oxygen well (mid 90's or higher). I think a formula should be made that combines both factors of FEV1 and oxygen saturation. I think part of the reason they don't use a formula though is that FEV1 is not very likely to increase (dramatically) while a person can increase their O2 sats through cardio training and exercise.

In my case, I feel quite well with an average FEV1 of about 35%. I am not in the best shape, but I am on my feet for 10+ hours a day walking around. This wasn't always the case though. A number of years back, after being extremely sick for a long time, my FEV1 was only around 20%, my O2 sats had a hard time getting above 87%. I eventually got both numbers back up, but when I would exercise or do anything strenuous (after being so inactive from being sick), my sats would still drop fast even though resting they were around 93%. Now, about 8 years later, this no longer happens. My FEV1 has been plateaued for the last number of years, generally around the 35%, my sats are 92-96% average (laying down/upright) and I am quite active in my job. Clinically I am still severe, but I am more in shape and feel much better. I still don't work out though, and I should.

As the doctors say, it is truly important to work out and get adequate exercise, even if it does make you feel crappy.
 

bagged2drag

Active member
I think the matter of severity of cf needs to be based off much more than FEV1. The FEV1 factor in severity is strictly based off lung function (by means of volume). The problem is, it doesn't account for the transfer of oxygen, as well as the overall cardiovascular shape a person is in. One can have decent clinical lung function (say in the 70's or 80's) yet not feel well or cope with the damage because they are not able to transfer oxygen efficiently (low sats). The next person can have an FEV1 of 35, be considered to be a severe case, and feel relatively well because they have less infection or are in better cardiovascular health and transfer oxygen well (mid 90's or higher). I think a formula should be made that combines both factors of FEV1 and oxygen saturation. I think part of the reason they don't use a formula though is that FEV1 is not very likely to increase (dramatically) while a person can increase their O2 sats through cardio training and exercise.

In my case, I feel quite well with an average FEV1 of about 35%. I am not in the best shape, but I am on my feet for 10+ hours a day walking around. This wasn't always the case though. A number of years back, after being extremely sick for a long time, my FEV1 was only around 20%, my O2 sats had a hard time getting above 87%. I eventually got both numbers back up, but when I would exercise or do anything strenuous (after being so inactive from being sick), my sats would still drop fast even though resting they were around 93%. Now, about 8 years later, this no longer happens. My FEV1 has been plateaued for the last number of years, generally around the 35%, my sats are 92-96% average (laying down/upright) and I am quite active in my job. Clinically I am still severe, but I am more in shape and feel much better. I still don't work out though, and I should.

As the doctors say, it is truly important to work out and get adequate exercise, even if it does make you feel crappy.
 

bagged2drag

Active member
I think the matter of severity of cf needs to be based off much more than FEV1. The FEV1 factor in severity is strictly based off lung function (by means of volume). The problem is, it doesn't account for the transfer of oxygen, as well as the overall cardiovascular shape a person is in. One can have decent clinical lung function (say in the 70's or 80's) yet not feel well or cope with the damage because they are not able to transfer oxygen efficiently (low sats). The next person can have an FEV1 of 35, be considered to be a severe case, and feel relatively well because they have less infection or are in better cardiovascular health and transfer oxygen well (mid 90's or higher). I think a formula should be made that combines both factors of FEV1 and oxygen saturation. I think part of the reason they don't use a formula though is that FEV1 is not very likely to increase (dramatically) while a person can increase their O2 sats through cardio training and exercise.

In my case, I feel quite well with an average FEV1 of about 35%. I am not in the best shape, but I am on my feet for 10+ hours a day walking around. This wasn't always the case though. A number of years back, after being extremely sick for a long time, my FEV1 was only around 20%, my O2 sats had a hard time getting above 87%. I eventually got both numbers back up, but when I would exercise or do anything strenuous (after being so inactive from being sick), my sats would still drop fast even though resting they were around 93%. Now, about 8 years later, this no longer happens. My FEV1 has been plateaued for the last number of years, generally around the 35%, my sats are 92-96% average (laying down/upright) and I am quite active in my job. Clinically I am still severe, but I am more in shape and feel much better. I still don't work out though, and I should.

As the doctors say, it is truly important to work out and get adequate exercise, even if it does make you feel crappy.
 

bagged2drag

Active member
I think the matter of severity of cf needs to be based off much more than FEV1. The FEV1 factor in severity is strictly based off lung function (by means of volume). The problem is, it doesn't account for the transfer of oxygen, as well as the overall cardiovascular shape a person is in. One can have decent clinical lung function (say in the 70's or 80's) yet not feel well or cope with the damage because they are not able to transfer oxygen efficiently (low sats). The next person can have an FEV1 of 35, be considered to be a severe case, and feel relatively well because they have less infection or are in better cardiovascular health and transfer oxygen well (mid 90's or higher). I think a formula should be made that combines both factors of FEV1 and oxygen saturation. I think part of the reason they don't use a formula though is that FEV1 is not very likely to increase (dramatically) while a person can increase their O2 sats through cardio training and exercise.

In my case, I feel quite well with an average FEV1 of about 35%. I am not in the best shape, but I am on my feet for 10+ hours a day walking around. This wasn't always the case though. A number of years back, after being extremely sick for a long time, my FEV1 was only around 20%, my O2 sats had a hard time getting above 87%. I eventually got both numbers back up, but when I would exercise or do anything strenuous (after being so inactive from being sick), my sats would still drop fast even though resting they were around 93%. Now, about 8 years later, this no longer happens. My FEV1 has been plateaued for the last number of years, generally around the 35%, my sats are 92-96% average (laying down/upright) and I am quite active in my job. Clinically I am still severe, but I am more in shape and feel much better. I still don't work out though, and I should.

As the doctors say, it is truly important to work out and get adequate exercise, even if it does make you feel crappy.
 
Top