Fat burn vs Fitness burn on Polar FT7 HRM

spfldpam

Sorry if this has been ask before....
I have a Polar FT heartrate monitor with chest strap I use for gym workouts. I notice my fitness burn minutes is usually always higher than my fat burn minutes on the readings after the gym. I assume it is because I am going over my heartrate too much so it then falls into fitness burn and not fat burn? Last night at the gym I tried to get the heart rate up for 2 min but it was up to 170 and then drop it down to 135 range for a minute or two or how ever long it took when on the ellipitical machine for my 30 min workout. I would do slow than fast, slow than fast. I thought by doing this I would have a higher fat burn but I didn't!
I usually do 30 min of ellptical machine, 25-30 weights/weight machines, then change into swimsuit and do around 15 min of water jogging and then a 45 min aqua cardio and strength class. My reading last night was: Gym workout 4:15-6:15. Elliptical 30 minutes intervals of fast to heart rate up to 170 then back to 135-141 off and on for entire time weight machines 30 minutes. 16 min water jogging 45 min water workout class. Per Polar hrm--1.01.12 time workout time 134.50 average heart rate 172 max heart rate. 14.68 fat burn. 89.28 fitness burn

BrianSharpe

Forget you ever heard the term "fat burning zone" as it is completely meaningless in respect to fat / weight loss.

While it is true that at very low intensity exercise you burn a proportionally higher amount of fat as fuel you burn a much lower number of calories overall (and you're still burning fat at higher intensities). Furthermore, the amount of fat burned during exercise does not really impact your weight loss, it's your total energy balance that counts.

Fat burning is of importance to endurance athletes as a distance runner will typically have 90 to 120 minutes worth of glycogen stored but, for all intents and purposes, an unlimited fuel supply by way of fat (even with a low % body fat).

SecretAgent27

I agree with the above.