Are you supppsed to stay in the fat burning zone?
Workout4Health
Posts: 447 Member
I watched Jerry Wards bios3 video and he says that anaerobic cardio burns sugar and not fat. But in Jillian Michaels book she said it doesn’t matter.
Jerry ward says you can burn 900 calories in 20 minutes and it won’t matter because you’re just burning mostly sugar and some muscle. He says he burns like 47 calories in 30 minutes but it’s all fat and this is the way to go.
Jerry ward says you can burn 900 calories in 20 minutes and it won’t matter because you’re just burning mostly sugar and some muscle. He says he burns like 47 calories in 30 minutes but it’s all fat and this is the way to go.
8
Replies
-
Does it matter if you put on the left sock first, or the right sock first?6
-
I watched Jerry Wards bios3 video and he says that anaerobic cardio burns sugar and not fat. But in Jillian Michaels book she said it doesn’t matter.
Jillian is right - fuel substrate used during exercise is irrelevant for fat loss/weight loss.
Jerry ward says you can burn 900 calories in 20 minutes
He's mistaken at best, a fool or a liar at worst.
and it won’t matter because you’re just burning mostly sugar and some muscle.
Muscle isn't a fuel of choice. He really sounds clueless!
He says he burns like 47 calories in 30 minutes but it’s all fat and this is the way to go.
Wut? Well that would be really significant when you need 3500 cals per pound of fat loss!! #endsarcasm
You might burn virtually all fat when you are sleeping, for the vast amount of time you are exercising you are burning a blend of carbs (glycogen) and fat (not subcutaneous fat though). Lower the intensity of exercise the higher proportion of fat, higher the intensity the higher the proportion from carbs.
At my typical long distance cycle pace I'm burning approx 500cals/hour. Roughly half from carbs (carbs eaten and stored as glycogen) and half from fat.
Now that might matter for endurance sports but it doesn't for weight loss - that's from your calorie deficit over an extended period of time.
My c. 150,000 cals burned from my 300 hours of cycling this year haven't left me "shredded" because I'm maintaining my weight - it's calorie balance that matters, not exercise intensity, duration or type of exercise.
17 -
This content has been removed.
-
Jillian is correct. Think of it this way:
You need to burn (on average) 500 calories more than you consume per day to lose 1 lb in 1 week.
Calories should be thought of as energy you burn or consume. You CANNOT make energy out of nothing, that would be miraculous.
When you just live, you burn a certain amount of calories, depending on individual characteristics (mostly just size), let's say 1500 for convenience. From walking around and affirmative exercise, you burn more. This is over-simplified, but let's say you can burn 100 calories in an hour staying in the "fat burning zone" or 500 doing vigorous exercise. In the one case you have burned 1600 cal that day, in the other you've burned 2000 cal that day. You eat 1500 cal. In the first case you have only burned 100 cal more than you consumed, but in the second you burned 500 cal more than you consumed. It really doesn't matter what you burn when exercising, as the extra calories have to come from somewhere (burning fat), and that that mostly happens during the rest of the day and not when exercising doesn't change the fact that the exercise played a role.
Make sense?5 -
I watched Jerry Wards bios3 video and he says that anaerobic cardio burns sugar and not fat. But in Jillian Michaels book she said it doesn’t matter.
Jillian is right - fuel substrate used during exercise is irrelevant for fat loss/weight loss.
Jerry ward says you can burn 900 calories in 20 minutes
He's mistaken at best, a fool or a liar at worst.
and it won’t matter because you’re just burning mostly sugar and some muscle.
Muscle isn't a fuel of choice. He really sounds clueless!
He says he burns like 47 calories in 30 minutes but it’s all fat and this is the way to go.
Wut? Well that would be really significant when you need 3500 cals per pound of fat loss!! #endsarcasm
You might burn virtually all fat when you are sleeping, for the vast amount of time you are exercising you are burning a blend of carbs (glycogen) and fat (not subcutaneous fat though). Lower the intensity of exercise the higher proportion of fat, higher the intensity the higher the proportion from carbs.
At my typical long distance cycle pace I'm burning approx 500cals/hour. Roughly half from carbs (carbs eaten and stored as glycogen) and half from fat.
Now that might matter for endurance sports but it doesn't for weight loss - that's from your calorie deficit over an extended period of time.
My c. 150,000 cals burned from my 300 hours of cycling this year haven't left me "shredded" because I'm maintaining my weight - it's calorie balance that matters, not exercise intensity, duration or type of exercise.
All of this.
The heart rate zones were not formulated for weight loss. These were designed to optimize energy conservation for long steady state endurance competitions - running, swimming, biking.3 -
Workout4Health wrote: »
Jerry ward says you can burn 900 calories in 20 minutes and it won’t matter because you’re just burning mostly sugar and some muscle. He says he burns like 47 calories in 30 minutes but it’s all fat and this is the way to go.
Sorry, but this made me laugh. OP, your question is a good one, but this statement is utter garbage. Think about it...does it even make sense?2 -
Lol, I remember "fat burning zone" from Kathy Smith/Dennis Austin VHSs in the 90s.0
-
lporter229 wrote: »Workout4Health wrote: »
Jerry ward says you can burn 900 calories in 20 minutes and it won’t matter because you’re just burning mostly sugar and some muscle. He says he burns like 47 calories in 30 minutes but it’s all fat and this is the way to go.
Sorry, but this made me laugh. OP, your question is a good one, but this statement is utter garbage. Think about it...does it even make sense?
Unfortunately, it does “make sense” which is one reason this zombie idea continues to walk the earth.
2 -
It was just a gimmick by Kathy Smith to sell her fat burning workout video which I bought.1
-
lporter229 wrote: »Workout4Health wrote: »
Jerry ward says you can burn 900 calories in 20 minutes and it won’t matter because you’re just burning mostly sugar and some muscle. He says he burns like 47 calories in 30 minutes but it’s all fat and this is the way to go.
Sorry, but this made me laugh. OP, your question is a good one, but this statement is utter garbage. Think about it...does it even make sense?
Unfortunately, it does “make sense” which is one reason this zombie idea continues to walk the earth.
It makes sense that a 47 calorie burn is likely to lead to greater fat loss than a 900 calorie burn? Not to mention that neither of the scenarios provided is even realistic. I am not sure what kind of crazy exercise you would have to do to burn 2700 calories an hour and you can burn 94 calories in an hour just by going about your daily business. It certainly doesn't make sense to me.5 -
carterbrent wrote: »It was just a gimmick by Kathy Smith to sell her fat burning workout video which I bought.
So do you mean there is no more Fat burning zone? (60-70% of mhr)0 -
lporter229 wrote: »lporter229 wrote: »Workout4Health wrote: »
Jerry ward says you can burn 900 calories in 20 minutes and it won’t matter because you’re just burning mostly sugar and some muscle. He says he burns like 47 calories in 30 minutes but it’s all fat and this is the way to go.
Sorry, but this made me laugh. OP, your question is a good one, but this statement is utter garbage. Think about it...does it even make sense?
Unfortunately, it does “make sense” which is one reason this zombie idea continues to walk the earth.
It makes sense that a 47 calorie burn is likely to lead to greater fat loss than a 900 calorie burn? Not to mention that neither of the scenarios provided is even realistic. I am not sure what kind of crazy exercise you would have to do to burn 2700 calories an hour and you can burn 94 calories in an hour just by going about your daily business. It certainly doesn't make sense to me.
I was referring to the general concept of the “fat burning zone”. When simply explained, it has a common-sense logic to it which can be easily understood and can be attractive to an untrained person. It’s 100% wrong, but many people don’t have the knowledge to realize that.
0 -
Nisnevyar2018 wrote: »carterbrent wrote: »It was just a gimmick by Kathy Smith to sell her fat burning workout video which I bought.
So do you mean there is no more Fat burning zone? (60-70% of mhr)
As CSARdiver said above, it's relevant to endurance sports and related training, not weight loss (or how much net fat you burn). There are reasons it's possibly beneficial to stay in a lower intensity zone for much of your training (Matt Fitzgerald's 80/20 discusses that sort of thing), but that has nothing to do with maximizing fat loss.1 -
In addition to specific training goals, this could also have relevance to diabetics. Knowing how many carbs vs fat will be burned in a given exercise session can help with those who require careful meal planning.8
-
Why?1
-
ForecasterJason wrote: »In addition to specific training goals, this could also have relevance to diabetics. Knowing how many carbs vs fat will be burned in a given exercise session can help with those who require careful meal planning.
Do you know of diabetics who are relying on this idea or are you just throwing stuff out there? The diabetics that I know keep their glucose meters handy and wouldn't rely on a guesstimate of how much of a given substrate is used when exercising.6 -
From this article that shows varying carb amounts people diabetics should eat in relation to exercise intensity, here is just one comment:ForecasterJason wrote: »In addition to specific training goals, this could also have relevance to diabetics. Knowing how many carbs vs fat will be burned in a given exercise session can help with those who require careful meal planning.
Do you know of diabetics who are relying on this idea or are you just throwing stuff out there? The diabetics that I know keep their glucose meters handy and wouldn't rely on a guesstimate of how much of a given substrate is used when exercising.I liked this article. It defined what the different intensity levels were by the exercises in each level. I also take my glucometer with me when I go to the YMCA and work out on the treadmill. If I get shaky, I take my bloodsugar reading then and treat myself before it gets to an emergency situation.
4 -
I watched Jerry Wards bios3 video and he says that anaerobic cardio burns sugar and not fat. But in Jillian Michaels book she said it doesn’t matter.
Jillian is right - fuel substrate used during exercise is irrelevant for fat loss/weight loss.
Jerry ward says you can burn 900 calories in 20 minutes
He's mistaken at best, a fool or a liar at worst.
and it won’t matter because you’re just burning mostly sugar and some muscle.
Muscle isn't a fuel of choice. He really sounds clueless!
He says he burns like 47 calories in 30 minutes but it’s all fat and this is the way to go.
Wut? Well that would be really significant when you need 3500 cals per pound of fat loss!! #endsarcasm
You might burn virtually all fat when you are sleeping, for the vast amount of time you are exercising you are burning a blend of carbs (glycogen) and fat (not subcutaneous fat though). Lower the intensity of exercise the higher proportion of fat, higher the intensity the higher the proportion from carbs.
At my typical long distance cycle pace I'm burning approx 500cals/hour. Roughly half from carbs (carbs eaten and stored as glycogen) and half from fat.
Now that might matter for endurance sports but it doesn't for weight loss - that's from your calorie deficit over an extended period of time.
My c. 150,000 cals burned from my 300 hours of cycling this year haven't left me "shredded" because I'm maintaining my weight - it's calorie balance that matters, not exercise intensity, duration or type of exercise.
All of this.
The heart rate zones were not formulated for weight loss. These were designed to optimize energy conservation for long steady state endurance competitions - running, swimming, biking.
I'm an endurance athlete, and wanted to co-sign this. If I'm going to put in more than 50 miles on the bike, I need to start in the fat burning zone so I don't run out of juice before the end. That's what the fat burning zone is for.
Whether you burn calories from fat or sugar (in truth it's always a combination of both) in the short term, what matters is whether you're in an energy deficit or not. If you are, no matter what they came from, you'll lose fat long term.
Fat burning zone isn't a myth, the myth is that it has anything to do with weight loss.7 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »
From this article that shows varying carb amounts people diabetics should eat in relation to exercise intensity, here is just one comment:ForecasterJason wrote: »In addition to specific training goals, this could also have relevance to diabetics. Knowing how many carbs vs fat will be burned in a given exercise session can help with those who require careful meal planning.
Do you know of diabetics who are relying on this idea or are you just throwing stuff out there? The diabetics that I know keep their glucose meters handy and wouldn't rely on a guesstimate of how much of a given substrate is used when exercising.I liked this article. It defined what the different intensity levels were by the exercises in each level. I also take my glucometer with me when I go to the YMCA and work out on the treadmill. If I get shaky, I take my bloodsugar reading then and treat myself before it gets to an emergency situation.
Except that article says nothing about in a "fat burning" zone. It says, in the actual article, for diabetics to check blood glucose with a meter and then have some carbs to offset the exercise use of blood sugar. In the actual article:Because of the risk of hypoglycemia, you should always check your blood glucose level before you exercise. Having a carbohydrate containing snack prior to exercising is one way to prevent exercise related hypoglycemia. Use the chart below to make the recommended adjustments, based on your glucose reading, before you exercise. Click here for a detailed, printable chart that shows single (15-gram) servings of carbohydrate-containing foods.
None of this is relevant to the OP, btw.2 -
While lower intensity exercise burns a higher percentage of fat with that type of exercise, burning more calories because of a higher intensity for the same duration will usually burn MORE fat overall.
So let's say someone burns 100 calories doing low intensity exercise for 30 minutes. Let's also say that the burn is 60% from fat. That's 60 calories.
Now let's say that same person does a high intensity workout and burns 250 calories in the same 30 minutes. Let's also say that the burn is only 35% from fat. That's 87.5 calories.
So the reality is, you STILL burn fat doing either, but realize that burning more calories overall STILL burn more fat. And we're not talking STORE BODY FAT here but dietary fat.
To burn STORED BODY FAT you have to be in deficit and you actually burn the most body fat AT REST.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
4 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »In addition to specific training goals, this could also have relevance to diabetics. Knowing how many carbs vs fat will be burned in a given exercise session can help with those who require careful meal planning.
Do you know of diabetics who are relying on this idea or are you just throwing stuff out there? The diabetics that I know keep their glucose meters handy and wouldn't rely on a guesstimate of how much of a given substrate is used when exercising.
I'm a type 1 diabetic and somewhat follow this... with a much more complicated approach than what is described.0 -
Ok, here is someone with diabetes who talks about the fat burning zone (along with other zones) in relation to his condition. This is still related to the OP, as the question didn't explicitly state whether for weight loss.ForecasterJason wrote: »
From this article that shows varying carb amounts people diabetics should eat in relation to exercise intensity, here is just one comment:ForecasterJason wrote: »In addition to specific training goals, this could also have relevance to diabetics. Knowing how many carbs vs fat will be burned in a given exercise session can help with those who require careful meal planning.
Do you know of diabetics who are relying on this idea or are you just throwing stuff out there? The diabetics that I know keep their glucose meters handy and wouldn't rely on a guesstimate of how much of a given substrate is used when exercising.I liked this article. It defined what the different intensity levels were by the exercises in each level. I also take my glucometer with me when I go to the YMCA and work out on the treadmill. If I get shaky, I take my bloodsugar reading then and treat myself before it gets to an emergency situation.
Except that article says nothing about in a "fat burning" zone. It says, in the actual article, for diabetics to check blood glucose with a meter and then have some carbs to offset the exercise use of blood sugar. In the actual article:Because of the risk of hypoglycemia, you should always check your blood glucose level before you exercise. Having a carbohydrate containing snack prior to exercising is one way to prevent exercise related hypoglycemia. Use the chart below to make the recommended adjustments, based on your glucose reading, before you exercise. Click here for a detailed, printable chart that shows single (15-gram) servings of carbohydrate-containing foods.
None of this is relevant to the OP, btw.
7 -
moosmum1972 wrote: »900 cals in 20 minutes. ....big fat lie.
Dammit...3 -
This content has been removed.
-
ForecasterJason wrote: »
Ok, here is someone with diabetes who talks about the fat burning zone (along with other zones) in relation to his condition. This is still related to the OP, as the question didn't explicitly state whether for weight loss.ForecasterJason wrote: »
From this article that shows varying carb amounts people diabetics should eat in relation to exercise intensity, here is just one comment:ForecasterJason wrote: »In addition to specific training goals, this could also have relevance to diabetics. Knowing how many carbs vs fat will be burned in a given exercise session can help with those who require careful meal planning.
Do you know of diabetics who are relying on this idea or are you just throwing stuff out there? The diabetics that I know keep their glucose meters handy and wouldn't rely on a guesstimate of how much of a given substrate is used when exercising.I liked this article. It defined what the different intensity levels were by the exercises in each level. I also take my glucometer with me when I go to the YMCA and work out on the treadmill. If I get shaky, I take my bloodsugar reading then and treat myself before it gets to an emergency situation.
Except that article says nothing about in a "fat burning" zone. It says, in the actual article, for diabetics to check blood glucose with a meter and then have some carbs to offset the exercise use of blood sugar. In the actual article:Because of the risk of hypoglycemia, you should always check your blood glucose level before you exercise. Having a carbohydrate containing snack prior to exercising is one way to prevent exercise related hypoglycemia. Use the chart below to make the recommended adjustments, based on your glucose reading, before you exercise. Click here for a detailed, printable chart that shows single (15-gram) servings of carbohydrate-containing foods.
None of this is relevant to the OP, btw.
OP was asking -- pretty obviously from a weight loss perspective -- whether you should try to stay in the fat burning zone and avoid more intense cardio. The answer is no, period.
That someone who is diabetic (which this thread was not about) may need to adjust fueling strategy based on intensity of exercise DOES NOT change that. Similarly, as I and others mentioned, the so-called fat burning zone may be used in endurance training and endurance activities, but that does not affect the answer to the OP's question which was (essentially): is it always better to stay in the fat burning zone and to try to avoid more intense exercise when trying to lose weight. The two contrasting views on the topic presented in the OP demonstrate this.
And once again, the link you give did not support your original point in that the poster was not saying diabetics should avoid the cardio zone or any such thing, but that TESTING will determine how you need to refuel (and you may be able to predict this based on intensity of exercise, especially with experience). OP was not asking "should I eat differently if I do cardio" or "I am diabetic, how should I time my food around exercise." Those are specific questions. OP was asking: "for fat loss, is there a reason to stay in the fat burning zone only," which is reflective of advice you hear, and terrible advice it is.4 -
This content has been removed.
-
This content has been removed.
-
Workout4Health wrote: »While lower intensity exercise burns a higher percentage of fat with that type of exercise, burning more calories because of a higher intensity for the same duration will usually burn MORE fat overall.
So let's say someone burns 100 calories doing low intensity exercise for 30 minutes. Let's also say that the burn is 60% from fat. That's 60 calories.
Now let's say that same person does a high intensity workout and burns 250 calories in the same 30 minutes. Let's also say that the burn is only 35% from fat. That's 87.5 calories.
So the reality is, you STILL burn fat doing either, but realize that burning more calories overall STILL burn more fat. And we're not talking STORE BODY FAT here but dietary fat.
To burn STORED BODY FAT you have to be in deficit and you actually burn the most body fat AT REST.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
So you're burning 250 calories instead of 100 only burns 27.5 more calories? That seems like a lot of wasted effort.
You're also burning fat when later that day you're eating your meal and your body is filling your glycogen back up instead of burning those carbs.1 -
Workout4Health wrote: »moosmum1972 wrote: »900 cals in 20 minutes. ....big fat lie.
Well that isn't what he was trying to sell. What he was saying was that people that burn crazy calories like 900 in a short time are not really burning fat. He did say in one video that he burns 47 in 30 minutes on a treadmill and that would burn more fat.
He's just a foul-mouthed salesman trying to sell complexity where none is required.
You need to think far broader than just the relatively short period of time most people are exercising.
Fat burning isn't just within the exercise period - it's what your body does when you are in a calorie deficit.
After intense exercise your partially depleted glycogen reserves will be topped up later when you next eat - you have diverted those carbs/calories eaten from immediate use to restocking your reserves and will be burning more fat because of it.
Have a read of this from Lyle McDonald....
https://forums.lylemcdonald.com/showthread.php?t=79
3 -
I wasn't saying that diabetics should only be in the fat burning zone, but rather having an awareness of the fat burn vs cardio zone is relevant to them.lemurcat12 wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »
Ok, here is someone with diabetes who talks about the fat burning zone (along with other zones) in relation to his condition. This is still related to the OP, as the question didn't explicitly state whether for weight loss.ForecasterJason wrote: »
From this article that shows varying carb amounts people diabetics should eat in relation to exercise intensity, here is just one comment:ForecasterJason wrote: »In addition to specific training goals, this could also have relevance to diabetics. Knowing how many carbs vs fat will be burned in a given exercise session can help with those who require careful meal planning.
Do you know of diabetics who are relying on this idea or are you just throwing stuff out there? The diabetics that I know keep their glucose meters handy and wouldn't rely on a guesstimate of how much of a given substrate is used when exercising.I liked this article. It defined what the different intensity levels were by the exercises in each level. I also take my glucometer with me when I go to the YMCA and work out on the treadmill. If I get shaky, I take my bloodsugar reading then and treat myself before it gets to an emergency situation.
Except that article says nothing about in a "fat burning" zone. It says, in the actual article, for diabetics to check blood glucose with a meter and then have some carbs to offset the exercise use of blood sugar. In the actual article:Because of the risk of hypoglycemia, you should always check your blood glucose level before you exercise. Having a carbohydrate containing snack prior to exercising is one way to prevent exercise related hypoglycemia. Use the chart below to make the recommended adjustments, based on your glucose reading, before you exercise. Click here for a detailed, printable chart that shows single (15-gram) servings of carbohydrate-containing foods.
None of this is relevant to the OP, btw.
OP was asking -- pretty obviously from a weight loss perspective -- whether you should try to stay in the fat burning zone and avoid more intense cardio. The answer is no, period.
That someone who is diabetic (which this thread was not about) may need to adjust fueling strategy based on intensity of exercise DOES NOT change that. Similarly, as I and others mentioned, the so-called fat burning zone may be used in endurance training and endurance activities, but that does not affect the answer to the OP's question which was (essentially): is it always better to stay in the fat burning zone and to try to avoid more intense exercise when trying to lose weight. The two contrasting views on the topic presented in the OP demonstrate this.
And once again, the link you give did not support your original point in that the poster was not saying diabetics should avoid the cardio zone or any such thing, but that TESTING will determine how you need to refuel (and you may be able to predict this based on intensity of exercise, especially with experience). OP was not asking "should I eat differently if I do cardio" or "I am diabetic, how should I time my food around exercise." Those are specific questions. OP was asking: "for fat loss, is there a reason to stay in the fat burning zone only," which is reflective of advice you hear, and terrible advice it is.
But certainly, with regards to weight loss, I do agree that there is no importance there.
1
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K 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
- 426 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