Slow Ticker = Low Calories??

wanderinglight

Today is Get To Know My Heartrate Day for me so I strapped my snazzy HRM on first thing before I even got out of bed. My first reading this morning was 53bpm.

During the "sedentary" portions of the day (i.e. like right now, tap tap tapping away on the 'puter), I'm averaging about 62bpm.

Now it's about 4pm here in beautiful sunny California and I'd say I've had a "lightly active" day. I'm not going to work out today, but I biked to the grocery store and then home with some pretty heavy stuff, took out the trash, did a bit of cleaning, pruned the plants, etc.

I was shocked to see that as of this point in the day, I've only burned 920 calories!!!! I've heard of some people burning around 2000 or even 3000 during their normal activities.

So am I burning so few because I'm a big sloth? Or because my heartrate is so low on average that it's harder for me to burn? And is that strange that my HR is so low during the day, then skyrockets up to 170bpm when I'm really doing a tough workout?

I was originally planning on wearing my HR on a non-workout day so that I could see what level to put myself in for my profile (i.e. "lightly active" or "sedentary") but now it's really got me wanting to workout so that I don't feel like a sluggish old slug!!!!

This whole thing is fascinating to me.

wanderinglight

Today is Get To Know My Heartrate Day for me so I strapped my snazzy HRM on first thing before I even got out of bed. My first reading this morning was 53bpm.

During the "sedentary" portions of the day (i.e. like right now, tap tap tapping away on the 'puter), I'm averaging about 62bpm.

Now it's about 4pm here in beautiful sunny California and I'd say I've had a "lightly active" day. I'm not going to work out today, but I biked to the grocery store and then home with some pretty heavy stuff, took out the trash, did a bit of cleaning, pruned the plants, etc.

I was shocked to see that as of this point in the day, I've only burned 920 calories!!!! I've heard of some people burning around 2000 or even 3000 during their normal activities.

So am I burning so few because I'm a big sloth? Or because my heartrate is so low on average that it's harder for me to burn? And is that strange that my HR is so low during the day, then skyrockets up to 170bpm when I'm really doing a tough workout?

I was originally planning on wearing my HR on a non-workout day so that I could see what level to put myself in for my profile (i.e. "lightly active" or "sedentary") but now it's really got me wanting to workout so that I don't feel like a sluggish old slug!!!!

This whole thing is fascinating to me.

sgtinvincible

Hey WL! The fact your resting HR is so low is indicative of a really healthy cardiovascular system. It's much lower than normal, and that rocks. It probably is a factor in less calories burned, but it also means that as you excercise you are more efficient at burning them.

Sounds like you are right on, if not better than most.

wanderinglight

I did remember reading somewhere that one of the reasons Lance Armstrong is such a freakishly strong athlete is that his resting HR is something like 35bpm, and it rockets up to 200bpm when he's biking. Something about the discrepancy between the two contributes to his amazing athletic ability. And I think his heart is like 33% bigger than most people's.

So, ya know, me n Lance...separated at birth...

Of course, something tells me Lance doesn't feel like he's going to die after 40 minutes on the elliptical.

Sigh.

wanderinglight

But just out of curiousity...has anyone ever read any info on the relationship between low HR and the ability to burn calories..?

wanderinglight

OKAY...final update on the heartrate.

Today, over the span of 12 hours I burned ****1825 calories****. That's IT!!!! Doesn't that seem like an inordinately low amount? Especially when you consider that showering uses 145 calories??

I've been wearing my HRM for 12 hours, and am heading to bed in an hour. I deliberately took a day off from my normal exercising routine, but I walked for 40 minutes this afternoon. That burned 300 calories. So if I *didn't* walk, I probably would have only burned 1500 calories!!

Isn't that crazy? When I calculated my BMR it said 1625 calories. So I would have burned 1625 just lying in bed, yet I only burned 1825 during a full day of normal working activity..?

I would have said today was a "lightly active" day because it included a bike ride to get groceries, doing chores, cleaning house, etc.

I don't know what to make of this. Does this mean that I'm a person that really needs to be working out a LOT because if I don't my metabolism is sluggish? HELP! PLEASE!!!

kerikitkat

Over TWELVE hours? Or did you mean 24? Because if you only did it for 12, you need to double that number to get your BMR.

AlbertSchwartz

Hi wanderinglight.

A low rest HR is good, as we all know. The fact that yours is lower than most doesn't mean you burn less cals.

You burn less cals than the people that do 2000 - 3000 cals a day because you are doing less activity.

The people that burn 3000 cals a day in they're normal activity are the people that don't sit in an office all day.

Also, you say about showering using this much cals etc, they are all average, everyone is differant. Check yours next time you shower (as long as the HRM is water proof )

Al

timisw

I kind of like how Wikipedia explains it -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basal_metabolic_rate

Especially the paragraph on Exercise physiology.

I know that I have taken my Marines to get VO2 tests to determine how in/out of shape they were, and the nutritionist was able to give us a ton of information from they system.

yoginimary

Over TWELVE hours? Or did you mean 24? Because if you only did it for 12, you need to double that number to get your BMR.

Not quite - since she is sleeping for around 8 hours of that extra 12 - but noted. When I did mine, which was higher than yours but I don't have a desk job, I added 500 for sleep (based on the websites I went to). So your 1825 + sleep + the other few hours of showering, eating, etc. Maybe up to 2500?

If you have the money, I would check out local universities for RMR or BMR tests (I can't remember which one they actually test) - this will give you a definite answer as far as your calorie burning ability. Some spas do this too, so if you have the cash, take a fitness weekend at the spa and do the whole fitness assessment thing :bigsmile: .

I'm not sure if Lance burns fewer calories because of his RHR being so low. I wish I had an answer to this.

banks1850

Wander, heart rate doesn't really matter to calories burned, as a matter of fact it's usually inverse in that, the reason you would have a slow heart beat is because your heart is stronger, and pumps blood further with every beat, and thus you don't need as many beats because your pushing more blood per beat. A healthy strong heart has a lower beat. That is why Lance Armstrong's BPM is so low. It's a proportional relationship. Lance has very dense muscles that need lots of oxygen when they work hard, so because his lungs are trained to be more efficient (because of workouts, your lungs get better at trapping oxygen) and his heart is so big (because the heart is a muscle and will grow and get stronger as we use it more), his heart is able to push more oxygen rich blood to his muscles to keep them working for him. But because his muscle mass is so dense, he needs more oxygen then most people, thus his heart must still beat extra fast to deliver it. But since his heart is so strong and fit, that isn't a problem for him.

As to your calories burned per day, Most people have a BMR of about 70% of their maintenance calories, so 1800 calories over 12 hours seems a fine to me, I mean, even if you only burn half of that for sleep time and 400 for the remainder of the time you are awake that's still somewhere around 2800 calories for a day. That's about what I burn in a day, and I am 6'2 188 lbs and a guy (that's not sexist, guys burn more calories then women)

wanderinglight

Thank you so much to everyone who replied. I think I have a better understanding of it now.

Thanks Sgtl, that Wikipedia article was helpful, and Viviakay, YES, the spa is ***always*** the answer!!! I'll see what I can find out there. Perhaps that can be my next good-for-me reward treat.

I guess what was freaking me out was that my BMR was 1625...so 1825 (or 2325, with sleep) didn't seem significantly higher. But Banks, thanks for a bit more explanation.

I don't think that I am that fit cardio-wise, to merit having a resting HR of 53 (just checked it), but maybe I am and don't even know it. It's true that I have been working out consistently for oh, 20 years now, so maybe.

It's also interesting because I'm not working right now, so my days are definitely more sedentary than when I'm filming. It will be interesting to see how many calories I burn on a normal day of shooting. I'm pretty sure it will be in the 5000 mark. I do know that on Deadliest Catch I was eating about 5000 calories per day and losing lots of weight, so it's got to be up there.

Wonder if there is anyone else like me out there who is all or nothing with regards to work activity.

sgtinvincible

Thank you so much to everyone who replied. I think I have a better understanding of it now.

Thanks Sgtl, that Wikipedia article was helpful, and Viviakay, YES, the spa is ***always*** the answer!!! I'll see what I can find out there. Perhaps that can be my next good-for-me reward treat.

I guess what was freaking me out was that my BMR was 1625...so 1825 (or 2325, with sleep) didn't seem significantly higher. But Banks, thanks for a bit more explanation.

I don't think that I am that fit cardio-wise, to merit having a resting HR of 53 (just checked it), but maybe I am and don't even know it. It's true that I have been working out consistently for oh, 20 years now, so maybe.

It's also interesting because I'm not working right now, so my days are definitely more sedentary than when I'm filming. It will be interesting to see how many calories I burn on a normal day of shooting. I'm pretty sure it will be in the 5000 mark. I do know that on Deadliest Catch I was eating about 5000 calories per day and losing lots of weight, so it's got to be up there.

Wonder if there is anyone else like me out there who is all or nothing with regards to work activity.

Glad it helped WL. When I was a SWAT cop my days were much like this. It was kinda a hurry up and wait kinda deal. Somedays we wouldn't have anything at all, and others we were humping 70 pounds of gear all over B.F.E. Makes planning your eating difficult (especially when like you said, you are burning 5k calories and eating like a horse, then go to sendentary and still wanting to eat like afore mentioned equestrian).

(Love Deadliest Catch btw, you do great work!)

wanderinglight

[/quote]



(Love Deadliest Catch btw, you do great work!)
[/quote]

Awwww thanks! Since I was the first girl to film on the boats, I'm definitely most proud of that show! But man oh man, it's nice to be home and sitting on my nice, stable, non-rocking sofa...

cp005e

Hi WL -

I have done this experiment twice myself, but I actually did wear my HRM for a full 24 hours (including while I was sleeping). I burned about 2200-2500 overall, with about 600-700 of that being while I was asleep (7-8hrs). My resting heart rate at my desk job is also pretty low, and if I'm lying down I've seen it get as low as 45 (so I'm sure it is probably even lower when I'm actually asleep).

I have been assuming the way in which the HRMs calculate calories burned is not just your actual heartrate but also based on the other information you put in about your height, weight, age, sex, combined with your fitness level (on the Polars, this is based on the fitness tests it has you do). I don't totally understand how the fitness test works, but I think it has to do with both your resting heart rate and how steady or variable it is.

Hope this helps! I would say that 1825 over 12 hours sounds just fine, even if you subtract a little bit for the walking - it seems pretty close to mine (actually higher), and my BMR is currently just under 1600 according to the calculator on this site. So I'd say you're in good shape. :flowerforyou:

sgtinvincible

(Love Deadliest Catch btw, you do great work!)
[/quote]

Awwww thanks! Since I was the first girl to film on the boats, I'm definitely most proud of that show! But man oh man, it's nice to be home and sitting on my nice, stable, non-rocking sofa...
[/quote]

Haha, I bet you drove those guys wild. No wonder it's the 'Deadliest Catch' they were to distracted to by you to be safe. :laugh:

banks1850

Hi WL -

I have done this experiment twice myself, but I actually did wear my HRM for a full 24 hours (including while I was sleeping). I burned about 2200-2500 overall, with about 600-700 of that being while I was asleep (7-8hrs). My resting heart rate at my desk job is also pretty low, and if I'm lying down I've seen it get as low as 45 (so I'm sure it is probably even lower when I'm actually asleep).

I have been assuming the way in which the HRMs calculate calories burned is not just your actual heartrate but also based on the other information you put in about your height, weight, age, sex, combined with your fitness level (on the Polars, this is based on the fitness tests it has you do). I don't totally understand how the fitness test works, but I think it has to do with both your resting heart rate and how steady or variable it is.

Hope this helps! I would say that 1825 over 12 hours sounds just fine, even if you subtract a little bit for the walking - it seems pretty close to mine (actually higher), and my BMR is currently just under 1600 according to the calculator on this site. So I'd say you're in good shape. :flowerforyou:

they use VO2 max for it too. VO2 max is is a measure of your blood oxygen levels. The more oxygen you can dissolve into blood, the more can be carried to your muscles to burn

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vo2_max

cp005e

they use VO2 max for it too. VO2 max is is a measure of your blood oxygen levels. The more oxygen you can dissolve into blood, the more can be carried to your muscles to burn

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vo2_max

I saw the Polar manual talked about that... but I don't see how the HRM can actually measure that. As best I could tell from the manual, it was just your heart rate and the variability of it over the period of the test. But I don't really understand enough about the heart to know how that correlates to VO2Max.

Love your sig, btw. :laugh: Family Guy FTW!

banks1850

I saw the Polar manual talked about that... but I don't see how the HRM can actually measure that. As best I could tell from the manual, it was just your heart rate and the variability of it over the period of the test. But I don't really understand enough about the heart to know how that correlates to VO2Max.

Love your sig, btw. :laugh: Family Guy FTW!

when you do your fitness test it calculates a VO2 max (not sure how exactly). I know you can do that, I don't know the formula, but I know you can. Something to do with heart rates and age and sex...etc. they're all intertwined, I pretty much trust them on this stuff. It may not be perfect, but it comes a lot closer then those gym machines.

shorerider

I read that wiki article and all it did was make my head spin!

The only thing I could understand is that the heavier you are, the more your body has to work to get moving, particularly during exercise, but I already knew that part.

Is it absolutely necessary to have a precise number for your BMR? I mean, if I input that I have a sedentary life and don't count any daily exercise as part of my daily routine, and I'm losing weight based on what MFP estimates my BMR at given that scenario, then is it necessary to get anything more precise?

banks1850

I saw the Polar manual talked about that... but I don't see how the HRM can actually measure that. As best I could tell from the manual, it was just your heart rate and the variability of it over the period of the test. But I don't really understand enough about the heart to know how that correlates to VO2Max.

Love your sig, btw. :laugh: Family Guy FTW!

Oh, and thanks about the quote. I had so many great phrases from Peter, I had a tough time choosing. here are some other memorable quotes from Peter.

Peter (as a child): Why did all the dinosaurs die out?
Man at Museum: Because you touch yourself at night.

Peter: Oh my god, Brian, there's a message in my Alphabits. It says, 'Oooooo.'
Brian: Peter, those are Cheerios.

Peter: (Grabs the microphone at a fast food restaurant) Attention restaurant customers: Testicles. That is all.

Lois: You're drunk again.
Peter: No, I'm just exhausted 'cause I've been up all night drinking.

Peter: Just don't forget our deal, Lois. I sit through this and later tonight I get anal. You hear me? No matter how neat I want the house you have to clean it.


Peter: Lois, um, go get the medical dictionary and look up "fork" and "lung."
Lois: Why?
Peter: Time is a factor, Lois.

Lois: Peter tell Chris that women are not objects!
Peter: Your mother's right Chris, listen to what it says.