Negative Net

moe0303

NorthCascades wrote: »

Meaning you have a cadence sensor?

So here's a question. Say you ride your bike up a hill, and you do it pretty quickly. When you get to the top of the hill, you turn around and coast down. But, at the top, your heart rate is pretty high, maybe it's near your max. It takes until the bottom of the hill (when you turn around and start going up again) for your heart rate to settle back down to normal. So, your leg muscles aren't working, but your heart muscle is working overtime. And this is cardio, so about the heart. That period where your heart rate is elevated but your legs aren't moving - does that count as exercise time? I think you can go either way on that.

With regard to the compendium, I would assume that the answer to that question is "No" since they make the distinction of time spent in motion. That doesn't mean that you aren't burning calories at a higher rate during that time, but that the formula isn't designed to account for the natural curve of that time period. You might be able to use an average of sorts in order to better estimate your overall burn, but it would have to be take into account the time spent coasting vs pedaling at different intensity levels.

rileysowner

NorthCascades wrote: »

Meaning you have a cadence sensor?

So here's a question. Say you ride your bike up a hill, and you do it pretty quickly. When you get to the top of the hill, you turn around and coast down. But, at the top, your heart rate is pretty high, maybe it's near your max. It takes until the bottom of the hill (when you turn around and start going up again) for your heart rate to settle back down to normal. So, your leg muscles aren't working, but your heart muscle is working overtime. And this is cardio, so about the heart. That period where your heart rate is elevated but your legs aren't moving - does that count as exercise time? I think you can go either way on that.

It is an activity tracker that can be put on your leg and will serve as a cadence sensor. Where the advantage comes in is the app recording cadence, speed, and distance and using them together in figuring out when you are actually working.

In terms of the scenario you mentioned, yes, your heart is working harder, but I am guessing that due to it size the amount of extra calories burned by that harder work is not a huge amount. It is not like the large muscles in your legs and the amount of energy they need to more you and the bike, so just because your heart is still beating fast, the calorie burn while coasting down the hill would not be exercise time. I am not sure on this, but I do know that heart stress tests are sometimes done using chemical stimulation of the heart to get heart rate up, especially for those who are not capable of the the time on a treadmill or exercise bike to do so. I don't believe that burns a huge amount of extra calories even though the heart is working quite hard.

stealthq

rileysowner wrote: »

NorthCascades wrote: »

Meaning you have a cadence sensor?

So here's a question. Say you ride your bike up a hill, and you do it pretty quickly. When you get to the top of the hill, you turn around and coast down. But, at the top, your heart rate is pretty high, maybe it's near your max. It takes until the bottom of the hill (when you turn around and start going up again) for your heart rate to settle back down to normal. So, your leg muscles aren't working, but your heart muscle is working overtime. And this is cardio, so about the heart. That period where your heart rate is elevated but your legs aren't moving - does that count as exercise time? I think you can go either way on that.

It is an activity tracker that can be put on your leg and will serve as a cadence sensor. Where the advantage comes in is the app recording cadence, speed, and distance and using them together in figuring out when you are actually working.

In terms of the scenario you mentioned, yes, your heart is working harder, but I am guessing that due to it size the amount of extra calories burned by that harder work is not a huge amount. It is not like the large muscles in your legs and the amount of energy they need to more you and the bike, so just because your heart is still beating fast, the calorie burn while coasting down the hill would not be exercise time. I am not sure on this, but I do know that heart stress tests are sometimes done using chemical stimulation of the heart to get heart rate up, especially for those who are not capable of the the time on a treadmill or exercise bike to do so. I don't believe that burns a huge amount of extra calories even though the heart is working quite hard.

Yes, exactly.

When you're startled at a horror movie, your heart rate takes a major jump, too. But you don't burn enough more to make any difference. Otherwise, all we'd need to do for cardio is to get our adrenaline going for a while.

NorthCascades

When you startle watching a horror movie, your heart rate is elevated, but not for very long. Your heart is a muscle, after all, and beating faster burns more energy than beating slower. If you could watch an especially scary movie that kept your heart rate at 180 bpm for an hour and a half, even if all you were doing was sitting on the couch, that would still burn more calories than watching at 60 bpm. That sounds crazy but getting back to the specific workout we're talking about, 20 minutes were spent with an elevated HR but with the pedals coasting. Which is a very different scenario than a startling scene in a horror movie.

This isn't the exact workout we're talking about, but it's the same type. Note the heart rate chart. My resting HR is 50.