Very confused about what my ideal BPM is.

breesu

I hope this is the right place to put this. I'm a 21 yr old girl, 220lbs, just started working out at the gym, where they have heart rate monitors. My BPM is usually anywhere from 150-158.

I think I read a little too much about BPM and what it's supposed to be and how much you're supposed to burn and "The Zone"/"The Danger Zone" .... and now I'm confused.

So here's all what I got out of everything I just read:
It says I should burn more calories than I eat. What? I eat 1300 calories a day, and according to the gym equipment I burn 300-400 calories. How am I supposed to burn that many without dedicating a whole day to the gym?

Speaking of which, how much should I trust the gym equipment when it comes to telling me how many calories I burned? Are those things at all accurate?

It says my BPM should be lower to burn more fat. I thought a higher intensity workout burned more calories + more fat? Can someone explain this to me like I'm five? Is 150-158 a good BPM for me to keep up in the gym?

singletrackmtbr

Check out some articles about resting heart rate and basal metabolic rate. You use calories to move, be awake, digest food, breathe, and everything else all day. The amount of calories burned depends upon your fitness level, age, height and weight, gender, and a bunch of other factors. THIS is what makes up the calories you burn. The exercise calories then get added in.

All equipment (gym equipment, heart rate monitors, step trackers, etc.) is imperfect at best at measuring true calorie burn. For this reason many people don't eat back all their exercise calories, and others (including myself) make adjustments to the MFP daily intake to achieve the desired results.

I put your numbers into a TDEE calculator. You didn't say how tall you are, so I just put in 5'6" just to have something there (being taller will increase the TDEE and shorter will decrease it). I also like putting in BF percentage for more accuracy.

For your maintenance I got a TDEE of 2136 calories per day. For a pound a week weight loss you would need a TDEE of 1136, which is the number you should put into MFP if that's your goal. Exercising will give you more calories to eat (some eat them back, some don't).

There is a lot of differing opinions about "the fat burning zone" and if it's a real thing. The fact is if you want to lose weight and make it mostly fat loss you need to eat in a deficit. As the weight comes off you'll want to add strength training to preserve muscle. Good luck!

dewd2

First, ignore the heart rate nonsense. It is pointless unless you are using it for training (for a run or cycle event).

Second, you already burn more than 1300 calories a day just by living. Anything you burn extra at the gym is a bonus.

Plug your numbers in to MFP and see what it says. Then follow it for a couple weeks and adjust (or keep it as it is if you are meeting your goals).

Keep it simple. Thanks to the diet industry it seems more complicated than it really is.

Good luck.

NorthCascades

breesu wrote: »

It says my BPM should be lower to burn more fat. I thought a higher intensity workout burned more calories + more fat? Can someone explain this to me like I'm five? Is 150-158 a good BPM for me to keep up in the gym?

You burn calories when you exercise. Those calories might come immediately from fat or from stored carbs, but as long as you are losing weight, this will result in fat loss.

There is no ideal bpm unless you're preparing for a specific goal, or in an event where monitoring your heart rate is useful. For example, it can help you pace yourself while you run.

Even when you're not at the gym your heart is beating and you're breathing and you're thinking and digesting food and you're probably even walking around some. All these things burn calories.

MeanderingMammal

breesu wrote: »

I think I read a little too much about BPM and what it's supposed to be and how much you're supposed to burn and "The Zone"/"The Danger Zone" .... and now I'm confused.

Don't overthink it, just go and train.

If you end up in a competitive discipline like running, swimming, cycling or indoor rowing then there might be some value in reading more into it.

AnnPT77

breesu wrote: »

I hope this is the right place to put this. I'm a 21 yr old girl, 220lbs, just started working out at the gym, where they have heart rate monitors. My BPM is usually anywhere from 150-158.

I think I read a little too much about BPM and what it's supposed to be and how much you're supposed to burn and "The Zone"/"The Danger Zone" .... and now I'm confused.

Understandable. I agree with those who say not to worry about it too much for now, as working at particular BPM is more a training tool for athletic progress than a crucial aspect of weight loss.

As you're getting started, for the first few weeks/months, just try to work at a pace that feels challenging, but that you can keep up for a while. Working hard, but not gasping for breath. If someone asks you a question, you should be able to answer briefly, but not really feel like you want to be having an extended conversation with long paragraphs in it.

Initially, think of the "danger zone" as being where you start to feel woozy, faint, have chest pain, start gasping consistently, or think you're likely to throw up. (Don't worry, you probably won't experience any of these, but if you do, reduce intensity or even stop for a while. If there's some major such incident, check in with your doctor just to be sure.) The point is that if you're seriously overdoing it, your body has built-in mechanisms to warn you that something's wrong. Listen to them.

Over time, you'll be able to increase intensity or duration and still feel challenged, but not defeated.

So here's all what I got out of everything I just read:
It says I should burn more calories than I eat. What? I eat 1300 calories a day, and according to the gym equipment I burn 300-400 calories. How am I supposed to burn that many without dedicating a whole day to the gym?

+1 to what others have said. You'd burn calories even if you were in a coma, just by being alive (this is your BMR, basal metabolic rate). For most people, that part of their calorie burn is the biggest percentage of the daily total. Then you burn some calories by doing routine daily stuff. That stuff plus BMR and some smaller things is your NEAT (non-exercise activity thermogenesis). Add your calories burned from exercise, and that would be your TDEE (total daily energy expenditure).

If you used MFP to calculate that 1300, you should be eating back some of that 300-400 calories from the gym, in addition to your basic 1300, because that's how MFP's system is designed to work. MFP calculates your NEAT, and knocks off some calories from that to give you a goal that includes a calorie deficit. With exercise calories, many people start by eating 50% of them.

Speaking of which, how much should I trust the gym equipment when it comes to telling me how many calories I burned? Are those things at all accurate?

Nothing is perfect. The machines that ask you for height, weight, gender, and/or age as part of set-up are likely to be more accurate than those that don't. When you log your exercise in MFP, use the closest database entry, compare the MFP calorie estimate to the machine, and consider using the lower of the two. Start by eating back 50% of that exercise on top of your 1300, and see what your loss rate is. If it's satisfactory, keep doing that. If you're losing too fast, eat back more of the exercise. If you're losing too slowly, consider eating back less of the exercise (but not if you start feeling fatigued).

It says my BPM should be lower to burn more fat. I thought a higher intensity workout burned more calories + more fat? Can someone explain this to me like I'm five? Is 150-158 a good BPM for me to keep up in the gym?

As others have said, it's not hugely important to weight loss that your BPM should be at a certain level. You could think of it as being that higher vs. lower BPM changes exactly how you burn the calories a bit, but you still burn them. If there's a kernel of usefulness in the lower BPM idea, it's that you can continue longer at a moderate but challenging pace, thus burning more calories, even though you may burn more calories per minute at a higher BPM (but you run out of energy sooner so likely go for fewer minutes).

One other factor: There are some formulas for determining heart rate ranges, but they're pretty approximate. Healthy hearts can operate at different levels in different people. Early on in your fitness, your perceived exertion is a pretty good guide to intensity. IF you get serious about athletic goals (getting faster at competitive thing, for example), then you might want to learn more about heart rate training.

For now, just work hard & keep going - you've got this!

cwolfman13

breesu wrote: »

I hope this is the right place to put this. I'm a 21 yr old girl, 220lbs, just started working out at the gym, where they have heart rate monitors. My BPM is usually anywhere from 150-158.

I think I read a little too much about BPM and what it's supposed to be and how much you're supposed to burn and "The Zone"/"The Danger Zone" .... and now I'm confused.

So here's all what I got out of everything I just read:
It says I should burn more calories than I eat. What? I eat 1300 calories a day, and according to the gym equipment I burn 300-400 calories. How am I supposed to burn that many without dedicating a whole day to the gym?

Speaking of which, how much should I trust the gym equipment when it comes to telling me how many calories I burned? Are those things at all accurate?

It says my BPM should be lower to burn more fat. I thought a higher intensity workout burned more calories + more fat? Can someone explain this to me like I'm five? Is 150-158 a good BPM for me to keep up in the gym?

When people talking about burning more than you're eating, they're not just talking about exercise...for most people exercise is a very small component of what they burn in a given day. You burn calories 24/7...you burn a crap ton of calories just existing...like your body is working pretty damned hard at you existing...then you have your day to day general activity and then finally, exercise.

Like, I "burn" around 1900 calories or so just existing...like I would pretty much burn those in a coma...I burn another 500 - 600 with my daily activity and somewhere in the neighborhood of 500ish with exercise most days...so my total "burn" would be in the neighborhood of 3,000 calories...so if I eat 2,500 calories, I'm eating less than I burn.

Don't overthink the training aspect of it...just go put in some work.