Question about Heart Zones

Jordu

I use a heart rate monitor during workouts that alerts me when I am going over or under my heart zone. It came with a booklet listing various benefits for each heart zone. For example, it lists "lose weight and burn fat" as a benefit for being in the 60%-70% of max heart rate, while the 70%-80% zone is listed as having the benefit of "[increasing] stamina and aerobic endurance".

I am wondering if the benefits for each heart zone are cumulative. Does each zone also offer the benefits for every less intense zone? My initial hunch is "yes", but I'd like to be sure.

MacMadame

No, they are no cummulative.

However, most of the stuff you read about training with heart rate zones is a bunch of bunk so it doesn't matter. If you want to lose the most weight and burn the most fat, do hard workouts. Don't worry about the "fat burning zone".

If you want to know more, I wrote a blog post about it the other day.

http://fattyfightsback.blogspot.com/2011/03/mythbusters-fat-burning-zone.html

Isa25

The heart rate zones are, in my honest opinion, fluff. The harder you work out, the higher your heart rate, the more calories you burn. Keeping your heart rate in a lower zone, besides if it is doc rec, will offer no true benefits - you just need to work out longer to burn the same amount of calories as you would in the higher zones.

http://www.livestrong.com/article/89822-fat-burning-zone-vs.-cardio/
http://www.cbass.com/FATBURN.HTM
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/332288/workout_tips_fat_burning_zone_vs_cardio.html?cat=51

david081

My fitness instructor recently advised me that I was working out at too high an intensity (I think the body starts burning stuff other than fat) for weight loss, he said 65-70% is best... For me that's an awkward heart-rate to maintain, but after a week I lost 3lbs. A slowish run (9kph) has me revving at 140ish...

TrainingWithTonya

The zones are based on when you are capable of burning body fat for fuel. If you are working at a low intensity then you are burning primarily fat for fuel % wise, but you aren't burning many calories so it isn't effective. If you are at a very high intensity, then you are burning primarily carbs for fuel so while you can burn a boatload of calories you get a lower percentage from fat. The 60-70% zone is where you are getting about a 50/50 mix of carbs and fat for your fuel. That's why it is called the fat burning zone, because you can burn more calories then the lower intensities and can get a bigger percentage of the calories burned from fat stores. It's all about what you can do as to what is best. If you can walk for an hour in the 60-70% range and burn 300 calories, then about 150 are from carbs and 150 are from fat stores. If you can run for an hour in the 75-85% range, and burn 600 calories, then it is about 120 calories from fat (20%) and 480 calories from carbs. So, the best thing you can do is do the math for what you are capable of. Most people can walk for an hour, but can't run for near as long so they may burn a few more calories from the higher intensity but they may not actually be burning as much fat for fuel. You just have to compare what you are capable of to see what is best for you. Also, remember that higher heart rates are going to burn more fat for people who are highly trained then for the average person, so as you progress in your training you will burn more fat at the higher intensities. Also keep in mind that beginners should never train too high in heart rate because of the risk of underlying heart disease they may not know they have. My best recommendation is to do lower intensity for longer duration when you first start a program and progress up to higher intensity as your health status and aerobic capacity increases.

IsMollyReallyHungry

bump!