Fat Burning heart rate
AllishComedy
Posts: 12 Member
So the equation I found to figure out the best fat burning zone is 220-age then take 60-70% of this. When I do my run I have it ingrained in my head to just be working as hard as possible so often my pulse is 160-180. This equation says I should be staying in the 125-135 range. Yes I'll be burning way less calories doing this but I should notice more coming off.
No matter if I'm seeing results on the scale with this or not is it really best to keep to this?
No matter if I'm seeing results on the scale with this or not is it really best to keep to this?
0
Replies
-
If you aren't training for a marathon or endurance event then it won't really matter in terms of body fat loss which zone you are in. Overall calorie intake and expenditure is what matters. So, work in a variety of ranges to get the cardiovascular benefits.2
-
So if I'm reading that correctly you're saying keep mixing it up?
0 -
AllishComedy wrote: »So if I'm reading that correctly you're saying keep mixing it up?
In terms of overall body fat loss, the zone you work in doesn't really matter. Yes, technically, you can burn more body fat intra workout at a specific zone, but post workout (once you eat), it will be replenished. And if you really want to get technical, you burn the most body fat sleeping.
What I am getting at, set up your workout based on fitness goals.2 -
The 'fat burning zone' is something that's really only useful for training purposes. You want to stay there if your goal is endurance. It helps conserve glycogen and stave off 'bonking'.
You will not lose more body fat than if you train in any other HR zone, given the same number of calories burned.
However, the fat burning zone is also a level of work that one can, with a proper training base, keep going for a long time. If you're willing to spend the time, more distance run = more calories burned.2 -
The fat burning zone has everything to with pacing during an endurance event and nothing to do with fat loss.
Why do we park in the driveway and drive in the parkway?2 -
What zone you are in won't matter for fat loss. What will matter is your calorie deficit. Fat is a gas tank. It doesn't matter how fast or often you fill it. What matters is the total put in and the total burned.1
-
Just think of your running as burning calories - that's what is significant for weight loss, not which zone you train in or what mixture of carbs and fat you burn during the workout.
Do you have performance or fitness goals for your running? That's when zone training may (or may not...) be significant and/or useful.2 -
Do you have performance or fitness goals for your running? That's when zone training may (or may not...) be significant and/or useful.
My goal is visually be less fat. I've dropped 50 pounds so far but my waist size is still essentially the same and it's annoying the hell out of me. But in pictures you can tell
1 -
AllishComedy wrote: »Do you have performance or fitness goals for your running? That's when zone training may (or may not...) be significant and/or useful.
My goal is visually be less fat. I've dropped 50 pounds so far but my waist size is still essentially the same and it's annoying the hell out of me. But in pictures you can tell
Sounds like you should look into lifting0 -
AllishComedy wrote: »Do you have performance or fitness goals for your running? That's when zone training may (or may not...) be significant and/or useful.
My goal is visually be less fat. I've dropped 50 pounds so far but my waist size is still essentially the same and it's annoying the hell out of me. But in pictures you can tell
Not much can be done about it except continue to lose weight. Genetics are the biggest factor in where the weight comes off and nothing can be done to change that. Ignore the "fat loss" zones and continue to live in a calorie deficit.
I'm down 95 ish and still have a big belly. Smaller than it was, but big none the less.3 -
AllishComedy wrote: »Do you have performance or fitness goals for your running? That's when zone training may (or may not...) be significant and/or useful.
My goal is visually be less fat. I've dropped 50 pounds so far but my waist size is still essentially the same and it's annoying the hell out of me. But in pictures you can tell
Sounds like you should look into lifting
I do 30-45 mins before the cardio0 -
AllishComedy wrote: »Do you have performance or fitness goals for your running? That's when zone training may (or may not...) be significant and/or useful.
My goal is visually be less fat. I've dropped 50 pounds so far but my waist size is still essentially the same and it's annoying the hell out of me. But in pictures you can tell
I have some good and bad news. The only way you are going to get a smaller waist size is by continuing to reduce body fat. Us guys just tend to hold it around our waists (Whatchagonna do?!).
The good news is that yes, your waist size will come down if you keep dropping your body fat.
The other thing you can (and should do) is lifting. Lifting will reconfigure your body so that your waist looks smaller. For example, your shoulders and back will get bigger and you'll look better overall.
Do both of these things and you'll be good. Stay the course.
One more thing, cardio after lifting tends to be catabolic, i.e. it takes away the gains you made during your lift. It would be more optimal to space out the cardio far away from your lifting. But you know what, if it's a choice between no cardio, then by all means go for it. It's still better off than nothing.
1 -
My heart rate tops at 199 when I run (I use the term loosely, mind!) and I find it impossible to run in such a way that my heart rate is in the "right" zone for fat burning, yet it still quite obviously uses fat as an energy source and I get slimmer from it, so *shrug* I wouldn't worry too much.0
-
It's really hard to know your actual fat burning zone without taking a VO2 Max Test. The equation is a very rough guess and can vary quite a bit from one person to another. For example I'm 60 yrs old so according to the formula my fat burning zone would be between 96 and 112. According to the VO2 Max test (which measures oxygen consumption and CO2 being expelled) I'm burning significant % fat well into the 140s. But that's just me. As many others have posted these fat/carb ranges are really important to understand for endurance training and for fitness goals but in the big picture aren't going to be significantly altering body composition.0
-
It's really hard to know your actual fat burning zone without taking a VO2 Max Test. The equation is a very rough guess and can vary quite a bit from one person to another. For example I'm 60 yrs old so according to the formula my fat burning zone would be between 96 and 112. According to the VO2 Max test (which measures oxygen consumption and CO2 being expelled) I'm burning significant % fat well into the 140s. But that's just me. As many others have posted these fat/carb ranges are really important to understand for endurance training and for fitness goals but in the big picture aren't going to be significantly altering body composition.
A recent study (2016) indicated that fat is part of the energy source for high-intensity exercise right up to the lactate threshold: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5007242/0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 422 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions