ideal heart rate - does it matter that much?
worej
Posts: 108
I'm interested in losing weight, and in toning up a bit; but my primary concern on the elliptical machine is just to make my calories burned count go up as high as possible.
When I use the heart rate monitors on the machines, usually I'm in the 170 - 180 bpm range. According to the ranges on the machine, this puts me outside of the "cardiovascular" zone and well out of the "fat burning" zone. However, if I slowed down enough to get my heart rate down where it should be, I feel like I'd have to work out twice as long to burn as many calories.
I'm a reasonably healthy person; I can maintain around 170 bpm for close to an hour fairly comfortably, and my resting heart rate is very low. I don't get faint or dizzy or anything. But if I'm to believe these machines, then my heart rate is way too high-- is this something I should be concerned about? Will burning at a faster rate like this somehow hurt my weight loss efforts or my body in any way?
When I use the heart rate monitors on the machines, usually I'm in the 170 - 180 bpm range. According to the ranges on the machine, this puts me outside of the "cardiovascular" zone and well out of the "fat burning" zone. However, if I slowed down enough to get my heart rate down where it should be, I feel like I'd have to work out twice as long to burn as many calories.
I'm a reasonably healthy person; I can maintain around 170 bpm for close to an hour fairly comfortably, and my resting heart rate is very low. I don't get faint or dizzy or anything. But if I'm to believe these machines, then my heart rate is way too high-- is this something I should be concerned about? Will burning at a faster rate like this somehow hurt my weight loss efforts or my body in any way?
0
Replies
-
Oh I would love to learn about this as well!0
-
Its all about what your trying to achieve. I do half and half when I work out. For the first half of my work out i bust my *kitten* and keep my heart rate in the 80-100% range. I burn a lot of calories doing this over 700 in 35 minutes. You do not burn many calories from fat when in the higher ranges, your main fuel is glycogen. In this zone your body learns how to deal with high levels of lactic acid as well, and improves your endurance. For the second half I keep my heart rate in the 50-70%. In this range 85% of the calories you burn are from fat. I do not burn nearly as much doing this but still manage to burn around 400 calories. You will have to work longer to burn more calories but they are mostly fat so if weight loss is your goal this is key. in the 70-80% you still burn calories from fat but not nearly as many.
Heart Rate Training is the best way to achieve your goal whether is is weight loss or peak physical condition.
All of this is what i have learned from reading about it on google so sorry if i do not have the tiny details correct.0 -
bump0
-
Bump!
0 -
bump, am wondering the same0
-
Its all about what your trying to achieve. I do half and half when I work out. For the first half of my work out i bust my *kitten* and keep my heart rate in the 80-100% range. I burn a lot of calories doing this over 700 in 35 minutes. You do not burn many calories from fat when in the higher ranges, your main fuel is glycogen. In this zone your body learns how to deal with high levels of lactic acid as well, and improves your endurance. For the second half I keep my heart rate in the 50-70%. In this range 85% of the calories you burn are from fat. I do not burn nearly as much doing this but still manage to burn around 400 calories. You will have to work longer to burn more calories but they are mostly fat so if weight loss is your goal this is key. in the 70-80% you still burn calories from fat but not nearly as many.
Heart Rate Training is the best way to achieve your goal whether is is weight loss or peak physical condition.
All of this is what i have learned from reading about it on google so sorry if i do not have the tiny details correct.
This!! Only difference with me is I go 80%-90% of my max HR on one day and then the next day I only go 50%-60% of my max HR. This allows me to be burning from my fat stores every other day. Here is a guide on the different zones....
TRAINING ZONES
Healthy Heart Zone (Warm up) --- 50 - 60% of maximum heart rate: The easiest zone and probably the best zone for people just starting a fitness program. It can also be used as a warm up for more serious walkers. This zone has been shown to help decrease body fat, blood pressure and cholesterol. It also decreases the risk of degenerative diseases and has a low risk of injury. 85% of calories burned in this zone are fats!
Fitness Zone (Fat Burning) --- 60 - 70% of maximum heart rate: This zone provides the same benefits as the healthy heart zone, but is more intense and burns more total calories. The percent of fat calories is still 85%.
Aerobic Zone (Endurance Training) --- 70 - 80% of maximum heart rate: The aerobic zone will improve your cardiovascular and respiratory system AND increase the size and strength of your heart. This is the preferred zone if you are training for an endurance event. More calories are burned with 50% from fat.
Anaerobic Zone (Performance Training) --- 80 - 90% of maximum heart rate: Benefits of this zone include an improved VO2 maximum (the highest amount of oxygen one can consume during exercise) and thus an improved cardiorespiratory system, and a higher lactate tolerance ability which means your endurance will improve and you'll be able to fight fatigue better. This is a high intensity zone burning more calories, 15 % from fat.
Red Line (Maximum Effort) --- 90 - 100% of maximum heart rate: Although this zone burns the highest number of calories, it is very intense. Most people can only stay in this zone for short periods. You should only train in this zone if you are in very good shape and have been cleared by a physician to do so.0 -
BUMP0
-
Very Helpful Thanks!0
-
So what's the difference between burning calories from fat, and from glycogen? If the source of my calories burned is not from fat, but from glycogen, will your body just consume fat calories later on when your glycogen stores are down? Or is that not how it works?
Practically speaking, I'm just wondering what the difference is day to day between burning from glycogen and from fat. I just thought a calorie was a calorie, and I just needed to keep my numbers down to improve.0 -
Interesting info. When I stay in the low range of the cardiovascular spectrum for my age I don't break a sweat nor do I breathe hard so I find myself in the red zone for most of my workout on the eliptical. I like to be drenched in sweat when I am done. Look forward to reading more and reevaluating my cardio workout as I still have 30 lbs to lose.0
-
Until recent times food, especially foods high in fat, were not readily available. Do to the body not knowing when its next meal will come from it will store fat. There is no limit to how much fat the body can store, there is no off switch that says "I have enough fat, I do not need to store anymore". High fatty foods and the amount of food available today has not been around long enough for evolution to take place in the body and put a limit on how much fat can be stored, if this will even ever happen. In a lot of foods you eat there are regular calories and calories from fat. The calories from fat are immediately stored, and you guessed it that is whether your body needs it or not. So the most efficient way to get rid of those calories from fat is to train in the 50-70% zone even the 70-80% will be more efficient then getting rid of calories from fat then a higher zone.
Glycogen on the other hand is just a fancy name for sugar. For glycogen their is a limit to which your body can hold, but you would have to work out for a very long extended period, and exert a high level of effort to extinguish your glycogen reserves. Im talking about running a marathon. When you do use up all your glycogen you will experience something that is called "hitting the wall" which is your body switching its source of fuel. That is why endurance and professional athletes over load in carbs the days leading up to an event in order to try and prevent from running out of glycogen.
You will improve your weight by just simply burning calories in any way possible. However; the most efficient way is to focus on your heart rate. Like you i get extremely bored keeping my heart rate in lower zones, but i found by exhausting myself during the first half of my exercise, the slow down is a welcomed change.0 -
See this is the problem I am having with the whole "stay in your fat burning heart rate zone" - my "fat burning" zone is so low that I feel as if I'm not getting a decent workout. I don't break a sweat (I have to be under 134 bpm). Now in order for me to feel like I'm working hard and actually breaking a sweat, I have to be at least 150 or above. 160 is where I feel like I am starting to really work hard and feeling it. Sometimes (especially on the elliptical and bike) I get up in the 170's and even got up to 180 doing a HIIT routine on the treadmill. when I saw 180 I got alarmed so I slowed down quite a bit. I felt fine, maybe a little short of breath. My favorite heart rate zone to stay in is anywhere between 140-160 but thats outta my fat burning zone!! :huh: What gives?? I have to endure slow boring workouts and burn a lot less cals to stay in this zone? this just isn't making sense to me....0
-
Its all about what your trying to achieve. I do half and half when I work out. For the first half of my work out i bust my *kitten* and keep my heart rate in the 80-100% range. I burn a lot of calories doing this over 700 in 35 minutes. You do not burn many calories from fat when in the higher ranges, your main fuel is glycogen. In this zone your body learns how to deal with high levels of lactic acid as well, and improves your endurance. For the second half I keep my heart rate in the 50-70%. In this range 85% of the calories you burn are from fat. I do not burn nearly as much doing this but still manage to burn around 400 calories. You will have to work longer to burn more calories but they are mostly fat so if weight loss is your goal this is key. in the 70-80% you still burn calories from fat but not nearly as many.
Heart Rate Training is the best way to achieve your goal whether is is weight loss or peak physical condition.
All of this is what i have learned from reading about it on google so sorry if i do not have the tiny details correct.
This!! Only difference with me is I go 80%-90% of my max HR on one day and then the next day I only go 50%-60% of my max HR. This allows me to be burning from my fat stores every other day. Here is a guide on the different zones....
TRAINING ZONES
Healthy Heart Zone (Warm up) --- 50 - 60% of maximum heart rate: The easiest zone and probably the best zone for people just starting a fitness program. It can also be used as a warm up for more serious walkers. This zone has been shown to help decrease body fat, blood pressure and cholesterol. It also decreases the risk of degenerative diseases and has a low risk of injury. 85% of calories burned in this zone are fats!
Fitness Zone (Fat Burning) --- 60 - 70% of maximum heart rate: This zone provides the same benefits as the healthy heart zone, but is more intense and burns more total calories. The percent of fat calories is still 85%.
Aerobic Zone (Endurance Training) --- 70 - 80% of maximum heart rate: The aerobic zone will improve your cardiovascular and respiratory system AND increase the size and strength of your heart. This is the preferred zone if you are training for an endurance event. More calories are burned with 50% from fat.
Anaerobic Zone (Performance Training) --- 80 - 90% of maximum heart rate: Benefits of this zone include an improved VO2 maximum (the highest amount of oxygen one can consume during exercise) and thus an improved cardiorespiratory system, and a higher lactate tolerance ability which means your endurance will improve and you'll be able to fight fatigue better. This is a high intensity zone burning more calories, 15 % from fat.
Red Line (Maximum Effort) --- 90 - 100% of maximum heart rate: Although this zone burns the highest number of calories, it is very intense. Most people can only stay in this zone for short periods. You should only train in this zone if you are in very good shape and have been cleared by a physician to do so.
Anybody have any good reference for what my target heart rate should be?
most of the charts I've seen really only use Age as the factor to determine your bpm.
Seems like some measure of fitness should fit in there too?
The maximum heart rate for a 50 yo women is like 175 bpm...
I would think that the maximum hr would be an uncomfortable place to be for any amount of time. But i find it frustrating to always trying to slowing down to keep it under 170. According to the elliptical my ideal burn zone tops out at about 148....
As I get more used working out will my heart work more efficiently and allow me to expert myself more without beating as fast?0 -
And thanks RickPatt for bringing your knowledge to this thread, I understand what you're saying but it still sucks lol0
-
TRAINING ZONES
Healthy Heart Zone (Warm up) --- 50 - 60% of maximum heart rate: The easiest zone and probably the best zone for people just starting a fitness program. It can also be used as a warm up for more serious walkers. This zone has been shown to help decrease body fat, blood pressure and cholesterol. It also decreases the risk of degenerative diseases and has a low risk of injury. 85% of calories burned in this zone are fats!
Fitness Zone (Fat Burning) --- 60 - 70% of maximum heart rate: This zone provides the same benefits as the healthy heart zone, but is more intense and burns more total calories. The percent of fat calories is still 85%.
Aerobic Zone (Endurance Training) --- 70 - 80% of maximum heart rate: The aerobic zone will improve your cardiovascular and respiratory system AND increase the size and strength of your heart. This is the preferred zone if you are training for an endurance event. More calories are burned with 50% from fat.
Anaerobic Zone (Performance Training) --- 80 - 90% of maximum heart rate: Benefits of this zone include an improved VO2 maximum (the highest amount of oxygen one can consume during exercise) and thus an improved cardiorespiratory system, and a higher lactate tolerance ability which means your endurance will improve and you'll be able to fight fatigue better. This is a high intensity zone burning more calories, 15 % from fat.
Red Line (Maximum Effort) --- 90 - 100% of maximum heart rate: Although this zone burns the highest number of calories, it is very intense. Most people can only stay in this zone for short periods. You should only train in this zone if you are in very good shape and have been cleared by a physician to do so.
These training zones are correct and we should all learn about them if we are wanting to improve performance. The "Fat Burning Zone" while true is sort of a misnomer. While you will burn more fat in this zone the effect on your overall calorie burn and metabolism is much lower. If you can keep your heart rate up in the higher ranges the immediate of effect is yes your not burning as much fat. The long term affect is you will stay in that fat burning zone longer after the workout, your metabolism stays higher for a much longer period of time allowing to burn fat calories through out the day.
Other ways to mix it up is to do interval training. Two good ones that I like are Max Intervals (doing a series of exercises all out for 2-3 min with short 30 sec to 1 min breaks) and HIIT (High Intensity Interval Training, with this one you push as hard as you can for 30 secs to 1 min before taking a 1 min breaking). Both of these are great for boosting your metabolism and increasing cardio condition. You wont burn as many calories in HIIT routine vs Max Interval but it has been found that you can burn up to 9X more calories over the next 48 hrs than doing a non interval workout (one with a steady continous pace). It is also recommended that you dont do HIIT routines on back to back days.0 -
I'm with those who find it feels ineffective when working out in the "fatburning" zone.
And boring :P0 -
I found this last night researching the topic. Pretty good read. Also includes a heart rate zone calculator about halfway into the article.
http://correct-weight-loss.net/2011/06/10/target-heart-rate-for-weight-loss/0 -
Wondering if someone can answer this question. Due to heart issues, my max heart rate according to the rehabilitation center I was going to is 138. My resting heart rate is around 80. The charts I've seen put my max heart rate for my age (35) at 185. I've lost about 11 pounds so far, but is it going to be harder for me to lose weight and improve my health because of my low max heart rate? Or will it not matter so much if I follow the training zones?0
-
Unless you have a medical condition that requires that you limit your intensity, or are taking medication that blunts your heart rate response to exercise, you should not be concerned with working out at a higher heart rate.
First of, there is NO reason to consider the "fat burning" effects of any exercise intensity.
The fuel you burn during exercise has NO effect on weight loss.
Again, so it is clear: The fuel you burn during exercise has NO effect on weight loss.
A balanced cardio program should include workouts at the three main intensity levels: easy, medium and hard. The reason for that is that a balanced program will provide most people with the best increases in fitness and endurance. Increasing your fitness level means you can work harder and burn more calories.
So don't choose an workout intensity based on some mythical "fat burning" results. A mixture of intensities and durations will provide a varied workout stimuli that will train all of your metabolic systems and allow you to make steady progress.0 -
bump.... to read later0
-
Thanks popalud, that article was very interesting.
I'm really glad to hear that I can have effective fat-burning in the higher zones. Like others here, I can't stand working out in the 60-70% zone.0 -
interesting! boomp to read later.0
-
It's about TOTAL CALORIES BURNED. Don't fret over the "zones". Bust your *kitten* and burn as much as you can.I'm interested in losing weight, and in toning up a bit; but my primary concern on the elliptical machine is just to make my calories burned count go up as high as possible.
When I use the heart rate monitors on the machines, usually I'm in the 170 - 180 bpm range. According to the ranges on the machine, this puts me outside of the "cardiovascular" zone and well out of the "fat burning" zone. However, if I slowed down enough to get my heart rate down where it should be, I feel like I'd have to work out twice as long to burn as many calories.
I'm a reasonably healthy person; I can maintain around 170 bpm for close to an hour fairly comfortably, and my resting heart rate is very low. I don't get faint or dizzy or anything. But if I'm to believe these machines, then my heart rate is way too high-- is this something I should be concerned about? Will burning at a faster rate like this somehow hurt my weight loss efforts or my body in any way?
A.C.E. Certified Personal Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 28+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition0 -
bump for later.0
-
Let me make this easy for everyone: You burn more fat at REST than any exercise you can do in an hour. Your RMR is the rate your body uses calories at rest. Those calories are from fat and most people are well over 1000 calories a day for RMR. So what's your best bet? RAISE YOUR RMR. That's NOT going to happen through steady state cardio. The body has to be INTENSELY trained and that will usually be ANAEROBIC exercise. Heavy weight lifting, HIIT, Tabata Protocol, etc. are INTENSE training and all raise RMR.
A.C.E. Certified Personal Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 28+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition0 -
Don't get too hung up about the differential between the fat-burning zone and the aerobic zone with regards to burning fat. Here's why.
In the fat-burning zone, 80% comes from fat.
In the aerobic zone, 50% comes from fat.
But those are *percentages*, not amounts. As people have noted, you'll burn more Cals in a given time in the aerobic zone, so you may be burning both more Cals and either the same or more Fat Cals.
An example is in order.
Say for the sake of discussion that you burn 500 Cals over a period of time in the fat-burning zone, but 800 in the aerobic zone.
In the fat-burning zone, 80%, or 400, Cals burned will be from fat, 100 Cals from glycogen.
In the aerobic zone, 50%, or 400, Cals burned will be from fat, 400 Cals from glycogen.
Note that well! Under either scenario, your fat Cals are the same, but total Cals are higher in the aerobic zone.
Granted, I made up those numbers. :bigsmile: The point is this: test yourself to see how many Cals you burn under either scenario for a set period of time. You'll then be able to compute your "fat Cals" breakeven point. My example was purposely made easy. Let me provide one a little more complex.
Under this example, assume the same burn of 500 Cals over a period of time in the fat-burning zone, but instead of 800 in the aerobic zone. the number is 700.
Doing the math for fat Cals only:
fat-burning zone: 400 Cals
aerobic zone: 350 Cals
So, to get the same fat Cals burned, you'd have to workout about 14% longer in the aerobic zone (700 * 1.14 = ~800 Cals).
...
Realize that, as you become more fit, you should see an improvement in your heart rate. What this means is that you will need to exercise harder in order to maintain your heart rate at a given level. For those who have an issue with not feeling challenged by the fat-burning zone, this is something that can be looked forward to.
....
The fat-burning zone is probably most useful for endurance athletes: folks who run marathons or ride their bikes 100 miles, as this zone more efficiently utilizes the body's stores of fat for energy during those endurance events, leading to a reduced (not eliminated) need for reliance on fueling during the performance.
As a caveat to the above, this is less true for professionals (on one hand) as they are likely to be performing at a higher intensity than the fat-burning zone. On the other hand, these folks tend to be incredibly fit, so what is fat-burning to them may be aerobic to you.
...
Another issue that comes in to play is that of exercise-induced eating and "eating your exercise Calories". Exercise-induced eating is the phenomenon of tending to eat more when more active. This is the body refueling. It appears that this behavior is minimized when utilizing more fat stores. With the MFP basis of eating your Calories, the emphasis with exercise is fitness, not weight loss per se.
...
Having said all this (and there are simplifications for the purpose of...well, simplicity), at the end of the day, given a Caloric intake, what matters is total Calories burned.
...
Sorry for the wordiness, and as stated, there are simplifications made, but I hope it has been helpful.0 -
Can't see the wood from the trees sometimes. :ohwell:0
-
So DL21004, this is why, as a 270lb female working hard regularly in my aerobic zone that I probably lose my appetite in the few hours following my workouts?
I find that it is quite difficult to eat even my allocated calories, never mind my exercise calories, when I have worked out regularly during the week. This is probably also a good reason for a rest day, to get my appetite back.
This phenomenon occurred before a few years ago when I was regularly swimming (albeit not as vigorously as some people) for 50 lengths x 3 times a week - I lost 5 stone in 6 months which I felt was too fast but I was forcing myself to eat as I had no appetite.0 -
bump0
-
So DL21004, this is why, as a 270lb female working hard regularly in my aerobic zone that I probably lose my appetite in the few hours following my workouts?
I find that it is quite difficult to eat even my allocated calories, never mind my exercise calories, when I have worked out regularly during the week. This is probably also a good reason for a rest day, to get my appetite back.
This phenomenon occurred before a few years ago when I was regularly swimming (albeit not as vigorously as some people) for 50 lengths x 3 times a week - I lost 5 stone in 6 months which I felt was too fast but I was forcing myself to eat as I had no appetite.
It does get complicated.
As I recall, aerobic exercise also has an appetite suppressing effect due to the release of ghrelin and maybe more.
My hunger isn't quite so predictable, but as an anecdote, I have found that personally, I can ride my bike (my exercise of choice) for up to about two hours without it impacting my hunger at all; if I ride four or more hours, I want to eat anything not nailed down.0
This discussion has been closed.
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
- 424 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