Calorie Discrepancies - Help!

TomO

TomO

0
I started doing interval training, because I read a lot of articles suggesting that steady state cardio in the "fat burning zone" was a waste of time. The two main arguments I've found for it are 1) that you'll burn more calories in a shorter time, and 2) that your metabolism will continue to be elevated long after your workout. My question is regarding assumption #1.

First, some facts about me. I'm a 58 yr. old guy, and the most liberal measure of max HR I could find suggests that my max is 168. My resting pulse is 52. BP is normal.

When I do a steady state workout, I normally go for 60 minutes at a steady rate of around 135 bpm. According to the machine, this burns around 980 calories.

When I do intervals, I do around 20 1 minutes sprints, during which my hr is elevated to around 155, and as high as 161, or 96% of my max HR. I can't sustain 161 for more than 90 seconds. I mention all this just to assure you that I'm not slacking off when I do intervals.

However, when I look at the calories expended, it's the same -- around 980 calories an hour.

I thought the problem may be the calorie count on the machine. So I measured both types of workouts using my Polar HRM. The results were the same, except lower! In other words, the Polar shows that I only burned around 900 calories in each workout, but no substantial difference between them.

Now, I still believe in the value of intervals. Since I started doing them 2-3 times a week, I feel much more fit, and they definitely have helped my blood pressure and resting pulse, which has dropped around 8 bpm.

But what about this claim that intervals burn more calories in a shorter period of time? I'm wondering if that's just hype.
 
One those machine and what they say are never accurate.

Two the reason HIIT burns more calories is because it takes into account not just calories burned during exercise but calories burned AFTER exercise. EPOC or Afterburn is raised to a degree to where you are burning more calories at a rested state for sometimes DAYS after. IF you do it right that is. Regardless even aggressive interval training will produce better EPOC than steady state any day of the week.

It isn't hype, there is tons of science to back it up. :)
 
OK, thanks. So that kind of confirms what I was thinking -- that HIIT doesn't necessarily burn more calories DURING the workout, but it does continue to burn calories AFTER the workout.

Another question. Is there a benefit to trying to push yourself to the max? For example, I try to push myself to 95% of max HR on at least 3 or 4 of the the sprints/hills. Is that a good thing to do?

I'm asking because I read an article by Dr. Cooper, who said that this was dangerous, since the first symptom of a heart attack for most people is death. But then I've read a lot of other articles that say if your BP is normal and you're in good health, this won't hurt you. Your body will simply fail or slow down when it can't take any more.

Who's right?
 
Interval training increases VO2 max. Last time I checked, this was a good thing for cardiovascular fitness.

Of course, if you have a pre-existing condition, you shouldn't be pushing yourself to the limits anyhow.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top