?'s about heart rate

ToTheLove

Okay, so let me get this straight. According to most things my "target heart rate" is 220-21=199x85% which is 169. Okay... If I work out at 169, I don't feel like i'm doing much at all! I usually work out at somewhere between 175 and 185. That's like... 90%. Is that okay??? I mean, that's good right? Does that mean I'm burning more calories than if I was working out at 80%?

This stuff is all just crazy to me.

ToTheLove

Okay, so let me get this straight. According to most things my "target heart rate" is 220-21=199x85% which is 169. Okay... If I work out at 169, I don't feel like i'm doing much at all! I usually work out at somewhere between 175 and 185. That's like... 90%. Is that okay??? I mean, that's good right? Does that mean I'm burning more calories than if I was working out at 80%?

This stuff is all just crazy to me.

AJCM

I believe the safe range to be from 65% to 85%, and you don't want to work out too much harder than that. If 90% feels fine, it's probably okay, just be aware of how you are feeling. I know that sprinting, and sudden bursts that are higher are okay, but be careful. You know those stories of athletes that can't get their heart rates down after pushing it too high? Just be careful.

How are you testing/monitoring your heart rate? Might you be getting a mis-count of the beats? If you are do a 10 second count, might it be possible that you are counting an extra second, which could increase your rate by many beats? Just a thought... I used to test it for 10 seconds on a stop watch, and realized that if I counted from the start of 1 to the end of 10, I actually counted for 11 seconds, therefore rendering the count erroneously high.

Life_is_Good

My rate gets up to 156 - target is 144 - when the machine tells me to slow down - I am more than willing to

BTW - I'm from MN, too... winter storm warnings tomorrow I hear - what's up with that!? :grumble:

neverbeenskinny

OK, here's the low down on the heart rate that you should work out at. It's a lot of information, so bear with me on this one. It use to be that the rule of thumb is age divided by 2, then 220 minus this number. But this isn't really accurate because this old formula is based on males that are non-athletic. If you're female and considered "fit", then you actually take 211 and minus this number. If you're female and "not athletic", meaning have not worked out in a long time, you will take 226 and minus this number. Since I don't know you, you will have to make the determination if whether you are "fit" or "not athletic".

So let's say that you are "fit". You will take your age divided by 2, then 211 minus this number. This will give you your maximum heart rate at 100%.

Based on this number you will figure where 60%, 70%, 80% and 90% is.

Where should you train in?
Fat Burning -The optimal target to get to for fat burning is between 60 and 70%, BUT you must do this for a long period of time, such as 1 hour or more. If you go slow and keep your heart rate here and go for over 1 hour of training, you will be in the best zone for fat burning.

Cardiovascular Improvement - Between 70% and 80%. In this aerobic zone your body will transfer oxygen to your muscles, heart and lungs, which will push the carbon dioxide out which will improve your overall health. Depending on the level of your health, you will want to be here about 45 minutes to 1 1/2 hours.

Anaerobic State - between 80% to 90%. When you work in this zone, your body is no longer burning fat, but burning glycogen instead. When you burn glycogen you will begin to build lactic acid, that's when you develop cramps in the muscles.

Red Line Zone is anything beyond 90%. This is where athletes get their speed, you can only train here for minutes at a time, this is where athletes develop their "fast twitch" muscle fibers which allows them to have explosive power, but the explosive power last for only seconds.

Now decide what your goal is, most will either be in "Fat burning" or "Cardio Improvement". Then work with your heart rate within those areas.

It is quite complicated, so PM me if you want me to help you figure out your target heart rate.

kristie874

The longer and more you work out, the harder you will have to work out to get your heart rate up to where it should be. Just don't push your heart too hard!

ToTheLove

I believe the safe range to be from 65% to 85%, and you don't want to work out too much harder than that. If 90% feels fine, it's probably okay, just be aware of how you are feeling. I know that sprinting, and sudden bursts that are higher are okay, but be careful. You know those stories of athletes that can't get their heart rates down after pushing it too high? Just be careful.

How are you testing/monitoring your heart rate? Might you be getting a mis-count of the beats? If you are do a 10 second count, might it be possible that you are counting an extra second, which could increase your rate by many beats? Just a thought... I used to test it for 10 seconds on a stop watch, and realized that if I counted from the start of 1 to the end of 10, I actually counted for 11 seconds, therefore rendering the count erroneously high.

I go by the heart rate monitors on the machines

ToTheLove

My rate gets up to 156 - target is 144 - when the machine tells me to slow down - I am more than willing to

BTW - I'm from MN, too... winter storm warnings tomorrow I hear - what's up with that!? :grumble:

NO KIDDING!!! It's like... Can't we just have spring already!!!??

ToTheLove

OK, here's the low down on the heart rate that you should work out at. It's a lot of information, so bear with me on this one. It use to be that the rule of thumb is age divided by 2, then 220 minus this number. But this isn't really accurate because this old formula is based on males that are non-athletic. If you're female and considered "fit", then you actually take 211 and minus this number. If you're female and "not athletic", meaning have not worked out in a long time, you will take 226 and minus this number. Since I don't know you, you will have to make the determination if whether you are "fit" or "not athletic".

So let's say that you are "fit". You will take your age divided by 2, then 211 minus this number. This will give you your maximum heart rate at 100%.

Based on this number you will figure where 60%, 70%, 80% and 90% is.

Where should you train in?
Fat Burning -The optimal target to get to for fat burning is between 60 and 70%, BUT you must do this for a long period of time, such as 1 hour or more. If you go slow and keep your heart rate here and go for over 1 hour of training, you will be in the best zone for fat burning.

Cardiovascular Improvement - Between 70% and 80%. In this aerobic zone your body will transfer oxygen to your muscles, heart and lungs, which will push the carbon dioxide out which will improve your overall health. Depending on the level of your health, you will want to be here about 45 minutes to 1 1/2 hours.

Anaerobic State - between 80% to 90%. When you work in this zone, your body is no longer burning fat, but burning glycogen instead. When you burn glycogen you will begin to build lactic acid, that's when you develop cramps in the muscles.

Red Line Zone is anything beyond 90%. This is where athletes get their speed, you can only train here for minutes at a time, this is where athletes develop their "fast twitch" muscle fibers which allows them to have explosive power, but the explosive power last for only seconds.

Now decide what your goal is, most will either be in "Fat burning" or "Cardio Improvement". Then work with your heart rate within those areas.

It is quite complicated, so PM me if you want me to help you figure out your target heart rate.

Wow, that's alot of info. I always just thought - the higher your heartrate, the faster you burn. I think I get the math and everything for figuring out my target heart rate. Thanks so much for all the great info!!!!

Based on what you've told me I am staying in the 80 - 90 % range which is where i think I wanna be.

Thanks again!!

neverbeenskinny

Actually if you work too long in the 80-90% range which is the Anaerobic stage you will burn glycogen instead of fat, glycogen will be replaced with lactic acid and will cause cramping. The Anaerobic stage is for short term workouts to build speed, OK to get to this point in interval training. To maximize fat burning and increase cardio condition you want to slow down and stay below 80% and work longer.

Access your goals then decide. If you're going for increase of speed and short sperts of energy go for the Anaerobic stage, otherwise go for the fat burning and cardio stages. Good luck.

nightangelstars

OK, here's the low down on the heart rate that you should work out at. It's a lot of information, so bear with me on this one. It use to be that the rule of thumb is age divided by 2, then 220 minus this number. But this isn't really accurate because this old formula is based on males that are non-athletic. If you're female and considered "fit", then you actually take 211 and minus this number. If you're female and "not athletic", meaning have not worked out in a long time, you will take 226 and minus this number. Since I don't know you, you will have to make the determination if whether you are "fit" or "not athletic".

So let's say that you are "fit". You will take your age divided by 2, then 211 minus this number. This will give you your maximum heart rate at 100%.

Based on this number you will figure where 60%, 70%, 80% and 90% is.

Where should you train in?
Fat Burning -The optimal target to get to for fat burning is between 60 and 70%, BUT you must do this for a long period of time, such as 1 hour or more. If you go slow and keep your heart rate here and go for over 1 hour of training, you will be in the best zone for fat burning.

Cardiovascular Improvement - Between 70% and 80%. In this aerobic zone your body will transfer oxygen to your muscles, heart and lungs, which will push the carbon dioxide out which will improve your overall health. Depending on the level of your health, you will want to be here about 45 minutes to 1 1/2 hours.

Anaerobic State - between 80% to 90%. When you work in this zone, your body is no longer burning fat, but burning glycogen instead. When you burn glycogen you will begin to build lactic acid, that's when you develop cramps in the muscles.

Red Line Zone is anything beyond 90%. This is where athletes get their speed, you can only train here for minutes at a time, this is where athletes develop their "fast twitch" muscle fibers which allows them to have explosive power, but the explosive power last for only seconds.

Now decide what your goal is, most will either be in "Fat burning" or "Cardio Improvement". Then work with your heart rate within those areas.

It is quite complicated, so PM me if you want me to help you figure out your target heart rate.

Wow that's some really great information, thanks a lot!

lovesdaisies

I'm very confused about this whole heart rate thing . I have always been a walker. I also regularly work out with hand weights, but have always avoided working my heart too hard because I have a slight heart murmur and I kind of tiptoe gingerly when it comes to disrupting it. I have never been told by my doctor NOT to do exercise (but I plan on discussing all of this with her during my next physical), but I sort of "baby" my heart.

That said, based on "never been skinny's" calculations, if I go by the 211 minus half my age I come up with 188. From there, am I suppose to take 85%? 65%? How long am I suppose to keep my heart at a specific heart rate?

And then when I read some of the posts, like the one about athletes not being able to bring their heart rates down, and don't push your heart too hard, I get a little worried.

I just don't want to do anything to jeopardize my health - yet I want my exercise to count.

FYI - I have about 7 pounds to lose as of today to reach my goal weight. I power walk at least 5 days a week, work out with a trainer one day a week and one additional day I try to incorporate the stuff I worked on with my trainer the week before. My heart rate is sky HIGH when I work out with him. Don't know how fast its beating, but it goes pretty-much from the time I get in there with him.

If there are any doctors out there who can ease my mind - or anyone with a similar problem - I'd appreciate some input or advice.

THANKS!

banks1850

to my knowledge there aren't any doctors on this site. And I would definately check with your doctor before pushing your self. As far as monitoring your heart rate, normally I would tell people to buy a good heart rate monitor. They are usually anywhere from 30 or 40 bucks for a cheapo to 150 for a top of the line model. Most people on here, myself included, seem to like the polars. The do a good job and you can find an F6 for about 80 bucks or an F9 for about 100. The F11's come with some cool extra features but I think they are about 120 bucks or so, it's up to you whether you will think you can use all the extras though.

edyta

I bought polar f6 heart rate monitor few days ago and I think it has even too much features for me
Yesterday I checked with my bicycle heart rate monitor and it showed on average 10bpm less than polar all the time.
So bear in mind that sensors in machines are not accurate. Maybe if you keep hands on sensors all the time but I'm not sure it this would be much better.

There is also sth like RPE but for me it's difficult to assess if I can talk "easily"
http://blubberbegone.wordpress.com/2007/10/27/interval-training/

* RPE 1–2: Very easy; you can converse with no effort
* RPE 3: Easy; you can converse with almost no effort
* RPE 4: Moderately easy; you can converse comfortably with little effort
* RPE 5: Moderate; conversation requires some effort
* RPE 6: Moderately hard; conversation requires quite a bit of effort
* RPE 7: Difficult; conversation requires a lot of effort
* RPE 8: Very difficult; conversation requires maximum effort
* RPE 9–10: Peak effort; conversation not possible

neverbeenskinny

I'm very confused about this whole heart rate thing . I have always been a walker. I also regularly work out with hand weights, but have always avoided working my heart too hard because I have a slight heart murmur and I kind of tiptoe gingerly when it comes to disrupting it. I have never been told by my doctor NOT to do exercise (but I plan on discussing all of this with her during my next physical), but I sort of "baby" my heart.

That said, based on "never been skinny's" calculations, if I go by the 211 minus half my age I come up with 188. From there, am I suppose to take 85%? 65%? How long am I suppose to keep my heart at a specific heart rate?

And then when I read some of the posts, like the one about athletes not being able to bring their heart rates down, and don't push your heart too hard, I get a little worried.

I just don't want to do anything to jeopardize my health - yet I want my exercise to count.

FYI - I have about 7 pounds to lose as of today to reach my goal weight. I power walk at least 5 days a week, work out with a trainer one day a week and one additional day I try to incorporate the stuff I worked on with my trainer the week before. My heart rate is sky HIGH when I work out with him. Don't know how fast its beating, but it goes pretty-much from the time I get in there with him.

If there are any doctors out there who can ease my mind - or anyone with a similar problem - I'd appreciate some input or advice.

THANKS!

lovesdaisies - I think that with your heart murmur and the fact the the docs have already told you to exercise, you should really consult a doctor before doing ANYTHING. And the formula that I listed are for females in "fit" condition, you have already been told not to exercise, so please DO NOT jeopardize your health. Discuss the exercise issue with your doctor first.

jpwarner

I been going by this for my heart rate.

It is important to realize that the body has two different fuels it converts to energy: carbohydrates and fats. The body burns these fuels in different proportions depending on your fitness and the intensity of your workout. Your body stores fewer carbohydrates than fat, yet it accesses the carbohydrates more easily. So the goal is to make your body more efficient at burning the stored fat while sparing the carbohydrates. Working out at higher heart rates will burn more carbohydrate calories in the short term, but it is working out in the lower zones that trains your body to become efficient at fat burning. In turn, this improves your endurance and aerobic fitness, eventually leading to a faster metabolic rate during exercise. This means that over time, you can burn as many calories at a low intensity as you were previously burning at a high intensity. With proper training this can happen in as little as three to six months.

Therefore, the best intensity for weight loss is one that seems 'fairly light' to 'somewhat hard'. Often people who cannot lose weight, or who even gain weight despite high intensity exercise and restrictive dieting, find success through a combination of slowing down their exercise, and improving the quality of their diet. This approach is not only more effective, but it's more fun and easier to stick to long-term!

-- Emily Cooper, M.D.

banks1850

the problem with that JP is that not all people have the time, for instance, at my level of fitness (pretty high), I work out at 84% (my average) for a 1/2 hour or so and that nets me usually between 390 and 420 calories. If I wanted that rate for a 65% Heart Rate, it would take me well over an hour, and I just don't have the time for that. If you have the time, that's fine.
Also, if you want to do more then just burn calories (remember, working at these higher rates causes anaerobic burn, which means the muscles are working harder), this is one of the better ways to do that (along with circuit training). Remember, muscle burn's 3 times the calories at rest as fat pound for pound (about 6 calories/hour for 1 pound of muscle vs about 2 calories/hour for a pound of fat), so building muscle will, in the long run, allow you to KEEP the weight off, which is a problem for SOOOO many people who initially lose weight.

ckroys

the problem with that JP is that not all people have the time, for instance, at my level of fitness (pretty high), I work out at 84% (my average) for a 1/2 hour or so and that nets me usually between 390 and 420 calories. If I wanted that rate for a 65% Heart Rate, it would take me well over an hour, and I just don't have the time for that. If you have the time, that's fine.
Also, if you want to do more then just burn calories (remember, working at these higher rates causes anaerobic burn, which means the muscles are working harder), this is one of the better ways to do that (along with circuit training). Remember, muscle burn's 3 times the calories at rest as fat pound for pound (about 6 calories/hour for 1 pound of muscle vs about 2 calories/hour for a pound of fat), so building muscle will, in the long run, allow you to KEEP the weight off, which is a problem for SOOOO many people who initially lose weight.

That's kinda how I feel about getting the calories burned...I don't have a lot of time to exercise, but I want to burn as many calories as possible. I'm usually on the elliptical for 20-30 minutes with my hr rate anywhere from 80-95% (according to my hr monitor), and then I do my weight training, where I keep my heart rate around 65-85% for about 30 minutes. Is this okay? I don't have any problems recovering from my elliptical exercise, getting back to normal rather quickly. I just want to be burning fat and using calories in the best possible way. If this is actually counterproductive, then I need to adjust... any thoughts/suggestions?:ohwell:

Azdak

Okay, so let me get this straight. According to most things my "target heart rate" is 220-21=199x85% which is 169. Okay... If I work out at 169, I don't feel like i'm doing much at all! I usually work out at somewhere between 175 and 185. That's like... 90%. Is that okay??? I mean, that's good right? Does that mean I'm burning more calories than if I was working out at 80%?

This stuff is all just crazy to me.

The problem with all heart rate calculations that depend on using a formula to estimate maximum heart rate is that there is a relatively high standard deviation in all of them--often 10-12 beats/minute. That means it is possible for 5% of the population to have a true HRmax of 20-30 beats above the calculated number.

You always have to compare a calculated "target heart rate" to how you actually feel during the exercise. Someone else posted a perceived exertion scale--that is an excellent tool. If you are cruising at a particular heart rate, and can maintain that intensity for 30 minutes or more, then you are probably in the 65%-75% of max effort range, not 90%. In any case, you are not overtaxing yourself.

Ideally, you should include a mix of longer, less intense workouts (55%-60% intensity) and more intense (75%-85%) shorter interval workouts into your routine, along with the "regular" ones (maybe one of each).

And don't worry excessively about calories burnt. As a rule, the higher the intensity, the higher the rate of calorie burn per minute--but also the shorter the duration possible. It is better in the long run to follow a consistent program of workouts/week, but vary the type, intensity and duration of workouts described above. That will result in increasing fitness and better overall results. The exercise calories will take care of themselves.

Azdak

the problem with that JP is that not all people have the time, for instance, at my level of fitness (pretty high), I work out at 84% (my average) for a 1/2 hour or so and that nets me usually between 390 and 420 calories. If I wanted that rate for a 65% Heart Rate, it would take me well over an hour, and I just don't have the time for that. If you have the time, that's fine.
Also, if you want to do more then just burn calories (remember, working at these higher rates causes anaerobic burn, which means the muscles are working harder), this is one of the better ways to do that (along with circuit training). Remember, muscle burn's 3 times the calories at rest as fat pound for pound (about 6 calories/hour for 1 pound of muscle vs about 2 calories/hour for a pound of fat), so building muscle will, in the long run, allow you to KEEP the weight off, which is a problem for SOOOO many people who initially lose weight.

That's kinda how I feel about getting the calories burned...I don't have a lot of time to exercise, but I want to burn as many calories as possible. I'm usually on the elliptical for 20-30 minutes with my hr rate anywhere from 80-95% (according to my hr monitor), and then I do my weight training, where I keep my heart rate around 65-85% for about 30 minutes. Is this okay? I don't have any problems recovering from my elliptical exercise, getting back to normal rather quickly. I just want to be burning fat and using calories in the best possible way. If this is actually counterproductive, then I need to adjust... any thoughts/suggestions?:ohwell:

Your heart rate during weight training doesn't mean what is does during cardio exercise. If you are doing traditional weight lifting (e.g. a set of lifts where you max out in 8-12 reps), then the HR increase does not reflect cardio training or the same level of calorie expenditure.

As others have mentioned, the primary benefit of strength training for fat loss is what happens afterwards as a result of the workout, not the calorie expenditure during the workout itself. Even if you don't gain that much lean mass, weight training is essential to successfully and permanently losing fat.

Everyone has to do what works for them. The only caveat I would make about your cardio routine is that is you do the same workout over and over, the body will become more and more efficient and you will see diminishing returns. If you can, varying either the workouts (e.g. intensity and duration) on the same machine or adding in different activities might be helpful.

ckroys

:frown:

the problem with that JP is that not all people have the time, for instance, at my level of fitness (pretty high), I work out at 84% (my average) for a 1/2 hour or so and that nets me usually between 390 and 420 calories. If I wanted that rate for a 65% Heart Rate, it would take me well over an hour, and I just don't have the time for that. If you have the time, that's fine.
Also, if you want to do more then just burn calories (remember, working at these higher rates causes anaerobic burn, which means the muscles are working harder), this is one of the better ways to do that (along with circuit training). Remember, muscle burn's 3 times the calories at rest as fat pound for pound (about 6 calories/hour for 1 pound of muscle vs about 2 calories/hour for a pound of fat), so building muscle will, in the long run, allow you to KEEP the weight off, which is a problem for SOOOO many people who initially lose weight.

That's kinda how I feel about getting the calories burned...I don't have a lot of time to exercise, but I want to burn as many calories as possible. I'm usually on the elliptical for 20-30 minutes with my hr rate anywhere from 80-95% (according to my hr monitor), and then I do my weight training, where I keep my heart rate around 65-85% for about 30 minutes. Is this okay? I don't have any problems recovering from my elliptical exercise, getting back to normal rather quickly. I just want to be burning fat and using calories in the best possible way. If this is actually counterproductive, then I need to adjust... any thoughts/suggestions?:ohwell:

Your heart rate during weight training doesn't mean what is does during cardio exercise. If you are doing traditional weight lifting (e.g. a set of lifts where you max out in 8-12 reps), then the HR increase does not reflect cardio training or the same level of calorie expenditure.

As others have mentioned, the primary benefit of strength training for fat loss is what happens afterwards as a result of the workout, not the calorie expenditure during the workout itself. Even if you don't gain that much lean mass, weight training is essential to successfully and permanently losing fat.

Everyone has to do what works for them. The only caveat I would make about your cardio routine is that is you do the same workout over and over, the body will become more and more efficient and you will see diminishing returns. If you can, varying either the workouts (e.g. intensity and duration) on the same machine or adding in different activities might be helpful.

I have been changing up the intensity, and do other things like jumping jacks, but based on what's been said, I just want to know that my hr during cardio isn't too high to be doing me any good...