Heartbeats Reveal Heartbreak

Elderly people who lose a loved one have higher pulse rates and more episodes of tachycardia than others who do not suffer a loss. Christopher Intagliata reports

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


That old saying, "she died of a broken heart?" It's not just poetry. Studies have shown that some people who lose a loved one may be at greater risk for a heart attack or cardiac death. And new research, presented this week at the American Heart Association's Scientific Sessions, offers clues for why. [Thomas Buckley et al., "Early bereavement is associated with increased heart rate and reduced heart rate variability"]

The subjects in the study included 78 volunteers who'd recently lost a spouse or child at a hospital, and a control group whose relatives survived the hospital stay. The average age of both groups was about 65. Researchers monitored the participants’ heart rates and rhythms for 24 hours, once within two weeks of the family death and again six months later.

Soon after their loss the bereaved had an average heart rate of 75 beats per minute, five beats more than the controls. And twice as many episodes of tachycardia: rapid heartbeats. They also scored higher on depression and anxiety tests, as you'd expect, which could be behind the physiological changes.

The good news: after six months, heart rates and rhythms were back to normal. But if you've just lost someone and feel physical heartache, the researchers recommend seeing a doctor. It could save someone else from grieving.

—Christopher Intagliata

[The above text is an exact transcript of this podcast.]

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe