fat burning zone

168 seems super high

no you dont need to be in the "fat burning zone" .. you burn more calories from fat there, APPARENTLY.. but you burn more overall calories if its higher.. i do HIIT and get my heart rate wayyyyyyy up there and it isnt "bad".. in fact its been working really well for me!

I do intense workouts too and stay between 170 and 185 for awhile.. I don't feel I have even had a good workout if I don't.. listen to your body.. if you feel like giving a burst of energy and it feels great.. then do it.. your body will respond.

Fat burning zone is a myth.. At least in how it's used in the fitness banter tossed around here and is a gimmick for machines.

It's about cardio endurance. Are you asking cause your wanting to know what to maintain to achieve a fitness goal? Or because your under the belief that your maximizing fat burn by being in it?


If your wanting to burn the most cals in the shortest time, then do the activity with highest METs (metabolic equivalent tasks). Like running.

You can learn about METs here http://njms2.umdnj.edu/hwmedweb/archives/exercise_health_archive.htm

no you dont need to be in the "fat burning zone" .. you burn more calories from fat there, APPARENTLY.. but you burn more overall calories if its higher.. i do HIIT and get my heart rate wayyyyyyy up there and it isnt "bad".. in fact its been working really well for me!

this you would have to go longer in the fat burn zone to burn the same amount of calories at higher intensity. A calorie is a calorie. As long as you have no medical conditions higher intensity is a ok

bump

Lets say:

- Low intensity burns 50-60 % fat and the rest carbs
- High intensity burns 30 % fat and the rest carbs


- 1 hour low intensity (Walking for instance) burns 200 cals(of which 60 % is fat, meaning 120 Cals fat burned)
- 1 hour high intensity (running for instance) burns 1000 cals(of which 30 % is fat, meaning 300 Cals fat burned)

So in other words, your hour walking burned 120 cals fat, while your hour running burned 300 cals fat. Although running burns less percentage fats, it still burns more overall with the more effort required.

I read a really great article about the various "zones" and what they're good for. You might like it, too:

http://www.medicine.ox.ac.uk/bandolier/booth/hliving/startoex.html

I'm an ex-smoker and WAY out of shape. I'm staying in the first zone most of the time to burn more fat per calorie but I'm starting to try to get into the second zone to burn calories faster, as well.

Hope it helps!

Cool thanks. I guess burning carbs isn't bad anyway I mean I'm on a calories deficit anyway so that burns fat too right?

Keep the sessions brief to 30-40 min if you do high intensity. Because actually, yes, burning the limited carbs stored is bad, very bad.

The math given above regarding ratio's is right on.

So in that 1000 cal burn run for 60 min, 700 cal from carbs.

Do you eat that many carbs in a day? Unlikely. 200 perhaps? That means 500 cal deficit from carb storage.

So do that several days in a row, high intensity 60 min.

Your limited glucose stores can NOT be topped off, they will keep going down. This will result in water weight loss because each gram of glucose has 2.7 grams of water. Muscles hold about 1500 cal, or 3lbs of glucose/water weight.

After that runs out in 3 days, muscle will be broken down to convert to glucose which is required still. Especially if you worked out on 4th day.
Now you are having real weight loss, muscle. So 500 calories of carbs converted from muscle would actually be a whole pound of muscle.
So you just lost 3 lbs of glucose and water, and 1 lb of muscle.
Include other water weight outside the muscle, perhaps a pound.
300 cal of fat from workout hardly touches a lb of fat with 3500 cals in it.

You just lost 5 lbs in your first week of extreme diet and exercise.
3 lbs is not real, meaning that is needed weight for energy.
1 lbs was really not desired, because muscle keep metabolism higher as it burns fat all day long. Bummer there.
Other water weight and true fat burning is probably another 1 lb - the true weight loss.

So - if you are going to exercise - eat back those calories, the above is why you need to feed your workout.

Yeah - if you're not overtraining it's fine - better to keep the kind of 85 - 95% MHR limited to interval training and not steady-state that! And if you're under 85% at 168, as long as you're not having ill effects, it's probably OK for more sustained time, and just a good idea, yeah, not to do that for a really long duration.

With regard to the fat burning zone stuff, yes, as people have said - when working much harder, you burn enough more calories that even though they have a lower PERCENTAGE of fat calories burned, the actual NUMBER of fat calories burned goes up. So it's well worth intense training. On the other hand, if you look at "fat burning zone" charts, they tend to be in a kind of 50 - 65% MHR range which, at least for me, is SUPER low and not at all intense - I consider warm-up time to be around 60 - 65% MHR, then I expect to keep myself no lower than 70% for my workout, often spiking above and usually sustaining closer to 75 or 80%. So that range is in the "less" fat-burning zone but good lord, I wouldn't "work out" at 60%! I aim for that kind of exertion several times a day in daily chores, tasks, walking around - fine for base-line fitness. So just get clear on what your training ranges are (maybe see a trainer at the gym, if you go to one?) then make plans accordingly. Good to mix up steady-state, longer, more sustainable endurance activities (a 3-hour hike! ice skating for a couple of hours! a moderate-paced run or fast walk, or cycle, for 45 minutes to an hour) with interval training (and of course resistance/weights) - they'll do very different things for your body and the steady state will help prevent overtraining and burnout.

oh and - QUIT SMOKING :P (sorry, ex-smoker, will always say something!)
just remember: you'll be a lot wealthier, at the very least, when you do...

How do I know what MY Max heart rate is. Yeah I know I need to quit. Been smoking for 18 years

If you have been physically active for awhile, you can try for a true maximal test - but you need a HRM.
At least borrowed, to know the HR.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/466973-i-want-to-test-for-my-max-heart-rate-vo2-max

If you are concerned about going until you almost puke, you can try a submaximal test.

http://doctorholmes.wordpress.com/2008/11/20/determine-your-maximum-heart-rate-with-the-step-test/

Don't worry about zones. Work out at whatever level you can sustain. Or feel free to bring the intensity up and down throughout your workout.

^^^ YES!! I do this and love it.. your body tells you what to do.. you will feel moments of giving it all you got and then you come down and then go back up.. It feels great.. you walk away feeling like you really worked out your bod. Good luck with everything!! ; )