Weight Loss Zone vs. Cardio Training Zone... meaning?

Most actually call it the fast loss zone. It is where you are burning a higher percentage of calories from fat. Of course the thing is that the cardio zone, even being a slightly lower percentage of fat burned is higher in amount of fat. So basically just ignore it.

did you know sitting on your *kitten* all dayburns purely from your fat stores? if the fuel source had ANY bearing on fat loss, then obviously the sit on your *kitten* all day exercise program is superior due to the % from fat it burns, right?

calories in < calories out = fat loss. thats as basic as it can get. though it does get slightly more complicated in that any exercise template should have all energy systems and muscle types worked to maximize fat loss, but the principle is the same. fat loss is a caloric issue, not a fuel source one.

weight loss zone....

I've been doing some reading about this recently, and this is my understanding - the 'fat burning'/'weight loss' heart rate zone represents the heart rate range in which your body is able to adequately fuel itself using fat as its primary energy source, rather than using more easily converted, but less abundant, carb-based fuels. The result is that you are burning body fat 'right now', rather than creating a calorie deficit to be recovered from fat later.

I'd be interested to hear any counterarguments from experts as IANAN - I am not a nutritionist!

The detail that I've pieced together from various places:

At any point in time, you can burn calories from a combination of carb-based sources (either being released into the bloodstream from food you've eaten, or from muscle/liver glycogen stores), fat, or even protein in extreme (read: bad) cases. Carb sources are the most easily utilised, and can even be converted to energy without the presence of oxygen - "anaerobically". This is effective for short periods of exercise, such as resistance training or a 100m sprint, but for longer periods of exercise, it is necessary and more efficient to use oxygen during the process - "aerobic" exercise. Unlike the carb sources, which can be converted in both states, body fat can only be used for energy in aerobic situations - when there are adequate levels of oxygen circulating the body. The conversion process is more complicated than for the carb sources, however, when compared to your limited glycogen stores, you have a far larger pool to draw upon (every kg of body fat = ~9000 calories of potential energy). So, it makes sense for your body to use this for energy in appropriate situations.

When you begin any exercise, you will initially be working anaerobically. As your heart rate and breathing increases, the amount of oxygen available to your muscles is increased, enabling aerobic energy conversion. Between the range of heart rates for 'optimal fat burning', you are able to pass enough oxygen around the body AND perform conversion of fat into energy, at the rate required to fuel the majority of your energy expenditure at that point - put another way, you are exercising hard/long enough that it makes sense to spend extra effort to oxyidise fat stores (in turn helping to preserve your limited glycogen stores), but not so hard that your body cannot convert fat fast enough to keep up with demand. So at this point, a large majority of your calories burned are coming directly from your body fat -- hence, the fat burning zone.

If you increase the intensity of your workout, you will reach the point where your body can not oxydise fat stores at the rate required to support your energy expenditure, and your body will start to look back to the more easily converted carb-based energy sources. The more the intensity increases, the greater the balance of carb sources vs. fats. So now, you are burning a higher amount of calories, but a lower proportion of body fat. Eventually, at very high levels of intensity, you are not able to get oxygen to the muscles quickly enough to support the amount of aerobic conversion required and your body looks back to anaerobic mechanisms to meet the gap, but this level of intensity can not be sustained.

So it's true, working at a higher intensity (above the "fat burning zone") results in greater overall calories burnt, which in time results in greater weight loss. One thing to note is that when you are exercising at a level that burns predominantly fat, you are literally doing that - using the fat on your body as an energy source for your exercise. Therefore, the majority of the 500 calories you just burnt in a 'weight loss zone' workout came from your fat stores, and you now - right in this instant - have approximately 55g less body fat then you did an hour ago. In contrast, after an intense workout that burns predominantly carb-based stores, you may have burned 800 calories, with a smaller amount coming from fat at that point in time. After your workout, as your body works to replenish its glycogen stores and recover, it will then look to the food you are eating, or your body fat, to provide it with the extra energy. So, carb-sourced workouts results in losing the fat at a later point in time, assuming you don't overeat.

One last thing this does suggest is that you should not re-eat calories burned from fat! If your workout burned 500 calories and you think that 300 of these came directly from fat, you should not aim to replace them. The 'food' for these calories was already provided (by your fat stores), so these workout calories do not need to be replenished, and will not contribute to a calorie deficit. In contrast, the calories that came from glycogen stores do need to be replenished, and if you don't do so with food, they will contribute to a calorie deficit.

WOW! This question posted brought allot of information. I had a similar question, which I am looking for the shorter answer.

I am obese, six weeks into a four day week weight lifting and cardio. I am 49 yr old female. From what I have read women as myself, over 40 do not loose weight so much from cardio as weight training.

I also had read that for my body I should have my heart rate at around 130.
I just as recent got myself from a walk on the treadmill to a jog on and off durring a 30 minute walk. In six weeks I have lost two inches in my waste and two in my hips. No weight loss in six weeks.

So question is, for my age, 49 yrs,BMR 1786.9, BMI 41.88 what burns more calories, should I work on getting more walking time, running, eliptical? I am increasing my weights almost weekly, as well as ab crunches. Ohh and I keep my carlorie intake around 1780, protein intake at 180 g.
Thank you all for your help and information. I really do appreciate mfp and all the members!!

WOW! This question posted brought allot of information. I had a similar question, which I am looking for the shorter answer.

I am obese, six weeks into a four day week weight lifting and cardio. I am 49 yr old female. From what I have read women as myself, over 40 do not loose weight so much from cardio as weight training.

I also had read that for my body I should have my heart rate at around 130.
I just as recent got myself from a walk on the treadmill to a jog on and off durring a 30 minute walk. In six weeks I have lost two inches in my waste and two in my hips. No weight loss in six weeks.

So question is, for my age, 49 yrs,BMR 1786.9, BMI 41.88 what burns more calories, should I work on getting more walking time, running, eliptical? I am increasing my weights almost weekly, as well as ab crunches. Ohh and I keep my carlorie intake around 1780, protein intake at 180 g.
Thank you all for your help and information. I really do appreciate mfp and all the members!!

the answer you`re looking for is take whatever you did the previous week, and do more your current week. more reps, more weight, longer times doing cardio, faster pace of cardio, etc etc. the idea being, you`re constantly challenging yourself every time you exercise.