In the opening piece of this series, I wrote that building a continuous “Knowing Yourself → Intervening Proactively ” feedback loop is a core strategy for achieving a Prime Life.
Because what gets measured, gets improved.
Just like we use bloodwork to monitor our metabolic health, or genetic testing to understand disease risks, our physical capacity — especially how well we move and endure — needs to be quantified, evaluated, and deeply understood.
Targeted assessments help uncover your weak spots, guide smarter training, and track progress over time. This, in turn, allows you to get more out of every drop of effort you put in.
A few months ago, I went through a full-scale performance evaluation, and to my surprise, the testing framework aligned almost seamlessly with the way I approach training. It breaks down fitness into five dimensions, each mapping onto a different physical trait:
- Metabolic and Cardiopulmonary Capacity — CPET
- Isometric Muscle Strength — Volume
- Functional Movement Quality — Functionality
- Postural Symmetry — Symmetry
- Body Composition — Body Composition
In this entry, I’ll start with the most foundational piece: the Cardiopulmonary Exercise Test (CPET).
CPET: A Stress Test for Your Mitochondria and Cardiopulmonary System
CPET stands for Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing.
In essence, it’s a graded treadmill or cycling test where you wear a mask connected to sensors that monitor oxygen intake, carbon dioxide output, ventilation rate, and heart rate in real-time throughout the session 1,2.
In recent years, CPET has emerged as a system-level biomarker for mitochondrial metabolic fitness — a proxy not only for athletic potential, but also for longevity and chronic disease risk [3–5].
Why is it so powerful? Because it reveals your body’s boundaries — both mitochondrial and cardiopulmonary — at different exercise intensities:
- Below the lactate threshold (LT1): It reflects your mitochondria’s aerobic capacity. This is the exact zone targeted by Zone 2 training.
- Between VT1 and VT2, and VO₂Max: It reflects your heart and lungs’ ability to deliver oxygen under peak stress. This is the zone targeted by HIIT training.
Let’s break it down.
Key Metrics for Mitochondrial Function
HR@VT1 — Heart Rate at First Ventilatory Threshold
This is your heart rate at VT1, where the body is still relying predominantly on fat oxidation for energy. It’s the true upper bound of your Zone 2 training range. Going above it means shifting to glucose metabolism, which is not the goal in this zone 6,7.
In exercise physiology, you’ll often hear two related terms:
· VT (Ventilatory Threshold) — based on changes in breathing patterns and gas exchange.
· LT (Lactate Threshold) — based on blood lactate levels.
Though measured differently, they correspond quite closely:
· VT1 ≈ LT1: The point where fat oxidation starts giving way to mixed substrate use. This marks the top of Zone 2.
· VT2 ≈ LT2: The point where lactate accumulates rapidly — crossing into anaerobic territory. This marks your aerobic ceiling 8,9.
Think of VT1/LT1 as your mitochondrial comfort zone, and VT2/LT2 as the red line for endurance.
Together, they define the full spectrum of your aerobic metabolism — from fuel efficiency to oxygen capacity 6,10.
Some reports refer to VT1/LT1 as the Anaerobic Threshold (AT), and VT2/LT2 as the Respiratory Compensation Point (RCP) — different terms, same turning points 6,9.
This metric is incredibly useful.
Remember when we discussed how to estimate your Zone 2 heart rate — typically 60–70% of max heart rate, or 40–59% of heart rate reserve? That’s a rough estimate. Your actual threshold can vary significantly.
By pinpointing your real VT1 heart rate, you can:
- Accurately gauge your mitochondrial health at your age.
- Customize your Zone 2 range for maximum training impact.
In my case, HR@VT1 was 141 bpm, while the estimated value based on 70% of max heart rate was only 125 bpm. That means my fat-burning zone extends further than expected. I can push harder in Zone 2 and still stay aerobic — leading to better efficiency per unit of time.
VO₂@VT1 — Oxygen Uptake at First Threshold
This is how much oxygen your body can consume at VT1 (in mL/min/kg). It reflects how well your mitochondria perform under purely aerobic conditions. Higher values suggest better mitochondrial density and enzyme activity — essentially, a bigger “aerobic engine” 7,11.
For a 40-year-old male, a VO₂@VT1 of ≥28–30 mL/kg/min is considered excellent [12–14]. But since most people can’t remember this number, we often pair it with a more intuitive ratio:
VO₂@VT1 / VO₂Max — Percent of Max Capacity at Threshold
This ratio shows what percentage of your VO₂Max you’re using at VT1. A higher percentage (e.g. ≥65%) means your mitochondria are highly resilient, capable of operating at higher intensities without switching to anaerobic metabolism 7[15–17].
Lower ratios (e.g. <50%) suggest your mitochondria “hand off” to the sugar-burning system too early — possibly indicating poor endurance or oxidative capacity.
VE/VCO₂ Slope — Ventilatory Efficiency
This reflects how much you have to breathe (VE) to eliminate each unit of CO₂ (VCO₂). Lower slopes = better metabolic efficiency. Normal range is 20–30. Values over 30 suggest reduced mitochondrial performance or early respiratory compensation [18–20].
Key Metrics Related to Cardiopulmonary Capacity
VO₂Max & VO₂Max/kg — Maximal Oxygen Uptake (Absolute and Relative)
VO₂Max refers to the maximum amount of oxygen your body can utilize per minute. When expressed relative to body weight (mL/kg/min), it becomes VO₂Max/kg — widely recognized as the “ceiling” of your cardiopulmonary fitness.
It integrates pulmonary ventilation, cardiac output, and the muscles’ ability to extract and use oxygen. Among all single fitness metrics, VO₂Max is arguably the most authoritative indicator of physical performance — and one of the strongest independent predictors of longevity [21–23].
As we’ve discussed previously, VO₂Max/kg makes it easier to benchmark performance across individuals. For males around age 40, a VO₂Max/kg above 40 is considered excellent 24.
In my own test, the values ranged between 36 and 41, based on two different modeling methods — meaning I’m still a bit below the benchmark.
Other Valuable Metrics
O₂ / HR — Oxygen Pulse
This measures the amount of oxygen consumed per heartbeat. It reflects both stroke volume (how much blood the heart pumps per beat) and oxygen extraction efficiency in peripheral tissues.
Higher values indicate more efficient heart function and better aerobic economy. As a non-invasive proxy for stroke efficiency, O₂/HR is widely used in performance testing 25,26.
BR — Breathing Reserve
Breathing Reserve (BR) represents how much respiratory capacity remains at maximal exertion. Normal values range from 20–40%.
If BR is too low (<15%), it suggests the lungs may be the limiting factor. On the other hand, if BR is high but VO₂Max remains low, the bottleneck likely lies in mitochondrial performance 1,27.
VT1 / VT2 (or LT1 / LT2)
The ratio between your first and second ventilatory (or lactate) thresholds reflects the transition from fat-based to carbohydrate-based energy metabolism.
- VT1 indicates the limit of mitochondrial fat oxidation.
- VT2 marks the onset of rapid lactate accumulation.
The wider the gap between them, the greater your metabolic flexibility.
This ratio can be calculated in terms of heart rate, VO₂, power output, or time. However, since VT2 is typically close to VO₂Max, this metric isn’t very practical for general users. That’s why VO₂@VT1 / VO₂Max is often used instead — it captures essentially the same insight 6,10.
These are secondary metrics, but each offers a slightly different lens on performance, and is worth having in your toolkit.
My Self-Assessment Summary
Mitochondrial Function
- HR@VT1: 141 bpm vs. an estimated 126 — solid result.
- VO₂@VT1 / VO₂Max: 73% — above average.
- VE/VCO₂ slope: rose gradually from 28 at VT1 to 30 at VO₂Max — still within a healthy range.
Overall, Zone 2 training has clearly paid off. My mitochondrial base is strong and well-adapted. There’s room for improvement, but the foundation is solid.
Cardiopulmonary Ceiling
- VO₂Max/kg: Two values were reported — 36 and 41 (from different algorithms). Since I haven’t yet added HIIT or peak exertion training into my routine, I lean toward the more conservative estimate of 36. That means I still have meaningful headroom to grow — getting to 38–40 is a clear next milestone.
Other Metrics
- O₂ / HR (Oxygen Pulse): My oxygen uptake per heartbeat increased progressively — from 5.8 mL/beat at rest, to 12.9 at VT1, and finally to 16 at VO₂Max. That’s notably higher than the general population average of 10–13 mL/beat, placing me in a solidly above-average range.
- BR (Breathing Reserve): My breathing reserve came in at over 30%, which is also a strong result.
Takeaways
Looking at the full picture, my mitochondrial function has a solid foundation. Zone 2 training has clearly built strong aerobic adaptability. That said, my VO₂Max remains in the average zone — there’s still meaningful room to improve.
This outcome aligns well with the emphasis of my current training plan and how I feel subjectively during workouts. But here’s the thing:
The ultimate goal isn’t just chasing a higher VO₂Max.
It’s about synchronizing my mitochondrial rhythms with the rhythms of my life — striking a sustainable balance between effort and recovery.
In the next training phase, I’ll continue to push the lower bound of endurance through deeper Zone 2 work, and simultaneously elevate the upper bound of cardiopulmonary capacity through strategic HIIT.
Pushing both ends of the spectrum outward — that’s how I define physiological progress in the pursuit of a Prime Life.
In the next entry, I’ll move on to the evaluation of muscular strength and functional capacity.
Let’s keep going.
Intervention recommendations are geared toward generally healthy individuals. If you have existing health conditions, always follow your doctor’s instructions.
References
[1]American Thoracic Society and American College of Chest Physicians. “ATS/ACCP Statement on Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing.” American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, 2003.
[2]Albouaini K, Egred M, Alahmar A, Wright DJ. Cardiopulmonary exercise testing and its application. Heart. 2007 Oct;93(10):1285–92.
[3]Kodama S, et al. Cardiorespiratory fitness as a quantitative predictor of all-cause mortality and cardiovascular events in healthy men and women: a meta-analysis. JAMA. 2009 May 20;301(19):2024–35.
[4]Rongali VBS, Knight J, Banfield C, Korompelis P, Rundle S, Smits A. Is Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing Predictive of Survival Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Surgery for Ovarian Cancer? Cancers (Basel). 2025 Apr 26;17(9):1460.
[5]Bolshinsky V, et al. Clinical covariates that improve surgical risk prediction and guide targeted prehabilitation: an exploratory, retrospective cohort study of major colorectal cancer surgery patients evaluated with preoperative cardiopulmonary exercise testing. Perioper Med (Lond). 2022 May 26;11(1):20.
[6]Seiler, Stephen. “What Is Best Practice for Training Intensity and Duration Distribution in Endurance Athletes?” International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 2010.
[7]Joyner, Michael J., and Edward F. Coyle. “Endurance Exercise Performance: The Physiology of Champions.” The Journal of Physiology, 2008
[8]Cerezuela-Espejo V, et al. The Relationship Between Lactate and Ventilatory Thresholds in Runners: Validity and Reliability of Exercise Test Performance Parameters. Front Physiol. 2018 Sep 25;9:1320.
[9]Faude O, Kindermann W, Meyer T. Lactate threshold concepts: how valid are they? Sports Med. 2009;39(6):469–90.
[10]Benítez-Muñoz, et al. Differences in the ventilatory thresholds in treadmill according to training status in 971 males and 301 females: a cross-sectional study. Eur J Appl Physiol 125, 499–510 (2025).
[11]Coyle EF, et al. Determinants of endurance in well-trained cyclists. J Appl Physiol (1985). 1988 Jun;64(6):2622–30.
[12]Lewthwaite H, et al. Normative Cardiopulmonary Exercise Test Responses at the Ventilatory Threshold in Canadian Adults 40 to 80 Years of Age. Chest. 2021 May;159(5):1922–1933.
[13]Akiyama H, Watanabe D, Miyachi M. Estimated standard values of aerobic capacity according to sex and age in a Japanese population: A scoping review. PLoS One. 2023 Sep 15;18(9):e0286936.
[14]Benítez-Muñoz JA, et al. Ventilatory Thresholds Differences According to Aerobic Fitness Level in 1450 Males and 241 Females on Cycle-Ergometer: A Cross-Sectional Study. Eur J Sport Sci. 2025 Jul;25(7):e12323.
[15]Simon J, Young JL, Blood DK, Segal KR, Case RB, Gutin B. Plasma lactate and ventilation thresholds in trained and untrained cyclists. J Appl Physiol (1985). 1986 Mar;60(3):777–81.
[16]Ferri Marini, et al. Factors Determining the Agreement between Aerobic Threshold and Point of Maximal Fat Oxidation: Follow-Up on a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis on Association. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 453.
[17]Maunder E, Plews DJ, Kilding AE. Contextualising Maximal Fat Oxidation During Exercise: Determinants and Normative Values. Front Physiol. 2018 May 23;9:599.
[18]Kabbadj K, et al. Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing: Methodology, Interpretation, and Role in Exercise Prescription for Cardiac Rehabilitation. US Cardiol. 2024 Dec 20;18:e22.
[19]Chaumont M, et al. How Does the Method Used to Measure the VE/VCO2 Slope Affect Its Value? A Cross-Sectional and Retrospective Cohort Study. Healthcare (Basel). 2023 Apr 30;11(9):1292.
[20]Hope K, et al. Ventilatory Efficiency Is Reduced in People With Hypertension During Exercise. J Am Heart Assoc. 2023 Jul 4;12(13):e024335.
[21]Myers J, Prakash M, Froelicher V, Do D, Partington S, Atwood JE. Exercise capacity and mortality among men referred for exercise testing. N Engl J Med. 2002 Mar 14;346(11):793–801.
[22]Bassett DR Jr, Howley ET. Limiting factors for maximum oxygen uptake and determinants of endurance performance. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2000 Jan;32(1):70–84.
[23]Ross R, et al. Importance of Assessing Cardiorespiratory Fitness in Clinical Practice: A Case for Fitness as a Clinical Vital Sign: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2016 Dec 13;134(24):e653-e699.
[24]Wang Y, Li H, Wang J, Zhao W, Zeng Z, Hao L, Yuan Y, Lin Y, Wu Y, Wang Z. Normal References of Peak Oxygen Uptake for Cardiorespiratory Fitness Measured with Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing in Chinese Adults. J Clin Med. 2022 Aug 21;11(16):4904.
[25]Otto, J.M., Levett, D.Z.H. & Grocott, M.P.W. Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing for Preoperative Evaluation: What Does the Future Hold?. Curr Anesthesiol Rep 10, 1–11 (2020).
[26]Umapathi KK, Nguyen H. Cardiopulmonary Fitness. [Updated 2023 Jul 19]. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2025 Jan-. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK560729/?utm\_source=chatgpt.com
[27]Glaab, T., Taube, C. Practical guide to cardiopulmonary exercise testing in adults. Respir Res 23, 9 (2022).
