to burn fat, keep heartrate at 130 if you're 20... is this true?

W

WOLVERINE1

0
I was using a stationary bike a few days ago, and on the display, it said

Cardiovascular for 20 year old: 160 heartrate
Fat burn for 20 year old: 130 heartrate

Looking at that, I said "ok that sounds doable." Then I realized I was working pretty hard on the bike, getting a good workout and feelin good, and saw my heart rate was about 160-170.

now I know cardio is great, but I really want to do fat burning. Is this low heartrate for fat burn true? It just seems so simple, thats why I ask. What do you fat burning masters do?

Moreover, I've heard HIIT is great for fat burning. But how can you keep a low heartrate with doing HIIT? Mine shoots up really quickly!! Thanks a lot ladies and gentlemen!
 
I THINK!! (dont take this to heart as im not the fat burning guru you seek, look to allen or gram, lol) that the hr for fat burning is low bc they assume you will be doing it for a long time..

the point of hiit is to get the hr high high up there and then let it come down a little, and put it right back up there.. then after ur hr will stay high and continue burning fat after you've finished!(for ~20 min)
 
I think the whole heart-rate stuff is nonsense. Especially when talking about HIIT. The whole purpose of HIIT is to get your heart-rate up, up, up - so that it boosts your metabolism far more than doing steady-state cardio where your heart-rate is only at, say, 130.
 
i'm doing a combo of both. to explain my routine, i did high intensity (cardio, 178 heartrate) and low intensity (fat burn, 130 heartrate).

8 minute warm up of low inten
2 minute high inten
3 minute low inten
2 minute high inten
3 warm down low inten

it felt really good too.
 
mreik said:
I THINK!! (dont take this to heart as im not the fat burning guru you seek, look to allen or gram, lol) that the hr for fat burning is low bc they assume you will be doing it for a long time..

the point of hiit is to get the hr high high up there and then let it come down a little, and put it right back up there.. then after ur hr will stay high and continue burning fat after you've finished!(for ~20 min)
Click to expand...

Your sort of right Mreik, The theory behind it is

Fat is a lazy tissue, therefore a slower, steadier heart rate will supposedly use fat for energy rather than glucose.

Personally , I think its bull**** and a ploy to get people to buy a bike/elliptical/treadmill. Lets look at the facts.

1. Lets assume John Doe walks into a fitness equipment store and knows nothing about fitness. He sees treadmill A that tells him he should work around 160, and treadmill b that says he needs to work out at 130, knowing human beings on average tend to be a bit lazy (until they get motivated, then there's nothing on the planet that can stop them). Which one do you think he's going to buy?

/end conspiracy theory thinking

2. Have you ever done exercise that keeps your heart rate at 130? I have. Its not hard. Even though this machine is telling me Im burning fat, I'm getting no other benefit from it (if Im actually burning fat at all). Im not at the gym to spin my wheels, Im there to work, to better myself.

3. The benefits of working at 160 as opposed to 130 are paramount. You get cardio condtioning as well as fat burn. Add HIIT in the mix (running wise) and you get 3 fold results (cardio, fat burn, and VO2Max capacity increase, thats why I love it so much).

THis next comment isn't a slam, its the truth sadly

How many overweight people do you see at the gym plodding slowly away on a machine week after week that don't change ? I see them all the time. I can bet their heart rate is around their "fat burning" zone. It may work at first, but it stops working.

Wolverine, what your doing is HIIT, your not really entering a fat burning zone. That zone is supposedly meant for sustained work in that range. What your doing (and I think Spock and Mreik would agree with me) is your putting your cardio into overdrive, which is good.

Try this though, see what happens

warm up for 5 minutes
do 1 minute high intensity interval
1 minute moderate intensity interval

then repeat. Work your way up to 10 intervals (if you can do them at first, thats great :D, work up the intensity of the high ones instead of adding more). After 10, 5 minutes cooldown. (warmup and cooldown are very important)
 
Who me? I did post my "before" pics. Im still trying to get some current pics almost 40 lbs lighter, I can't seem to find my digital though :/

Damn bro, I just reread my post and left something out that was friggin important.

Higher heart rate cardio (IMO) burns more fat then lower heart rate cardio.

I win the "long winded poster who fails to make his point because hes a moron" award for the day!
 
Last edited:
good to know! Thanks for the help. and I love this idea:
warm up for 5 minutes
do 1 minute high intensity interval
1 minute moderate intensity interval
But I thinking, how about 4 minutes for low intensity, and then the 1 min high intensity interval 1 min moderate intensity interval?
 
If not doing HIIT, then that appears to be right.You want to keep doing something contineous, while keeping the rate at a STABLE pace. ie..... 130 bpm for 20 min wont cut it, you need at least 45-60 min for that to be effective.
 
I'm SOOO confused!

This heartrate thread has me confused. Granted, I'm a newcomer to this whole thing having sat on my azz for 10 yrs and gaining 50 lbs. The doctor said you have arthritis in your knees and the next day I joined a local gym and have been going for a month now. (3 days on, 1 day off, etc.) --- On my way there now in a few actually --- Anyway, I've been doing 30-40 minutes on the cable weights with emphasis on thighs, arms and gut. Then 40 min on a treadmill. I go 3 minutes at zero incline, 2.9 on the speed until I'm warmed up, then 15 minutes at 3.0 incline at 3.2 on the speed, then when this really great song comes up on the mp3 player which is 4:54 minutes long, I pump up the incline to 11 or 12 and keep the speed at about the same. I get my HR up to about 155 and it feels great, but I can't maintain it for more than the song. When the song is over, I drop the incline back to 3, keep the speed the same, and my HR drops into the low 130's. I repeat the above until my time is up and then cool down for 3-5 minutes and my HR drops to 128ish. I've lost 8 lbs since I've started this, following a low calorie, high protein diet. BUTT (no pun intended) if I can do more, to keep 1-2 lbs rolling off each week -- I'm ON IT! Any advice? Comments?
 
A lot of what Aevans said is true, though I do disagree with one point. When you see those obese people plodding away on the treadmill, it may be that what they are doing IS high intensity for them. Or, it may very likely be that thier doctor has ordered them to keep thier heart rate under a certain level. For them to perform what you would consider high intensity could very well kill them.

The whole "Fat burning zone" thing is a bit deceiving. The reason it is displayed like that is this: Fat is your bodys most efficient source of energy, but it is also the most difficult to break down. During high intensity exercise, the demand for energy is too great for lipolysis to supply the demand. It still occurs, but at a reduced capacity, the breakdown of carbs is a much faster process.

When exercising in the "fat burning zone" you will burn a higher concentration of fat as opposed to other energy sources. The catch is, because you are exercising at a lower intensity, fewer total calories are burned. You also miss out on the increased metabolic effects of high intensity work, post training. Lets take a look at some of the pro's and cons.

Low intensity cardio:
Pros:
1) Higher concentration of fat burned, up to 70% as opposed to around 20% in high intensity exercise.
2) An over-all increase in fat mobilizing enzymes.
3) Easy on the joints.
4) Decreased muscle catabolization.
5) Mild increase in aerobic capacity.
Cons:
1) Fewer total calories burned than high intensity exercise.
2) Decreased hormonal response to exercise. (Endorphines, adrenaline, cortisol, can all help reduce body fat.)
3) Long and frequent sessions required to see effects.

High intensity cardio:
Pros:
1) Notable increases in aerobic capacity largely due to the strengthening of the heart.
2) Higher number of total calories burned. Although most of them are from glycogen stores, this is still a good thing since unused glycogen will be stored as fat.
3) Not much time needed to perform.
4) Hormonal response keeps burning calories at an increased level for up to 2 hours after exercise, depending on your time and intensity.
Cons:
1) Lower concentraion of fat burned during exercise. This is somewhat inconsequential due to the after effects.
2) Hormonal response includes increased cortisol levels, which catabolize proteins as well as fats to meet the high energy demand.
3) Can irritate sensitive joints. Chronic joint pain can occur if done too often, or without proper nutrition.

Both types are beneficial, most of the controversy exists because people will nearly always choose the one they enjoy more, and want to believe that it is the right way to do it. Both ways should be done and everything in between. All types of cardio are good, and beneficial to everyone.
 
wow. i forgot i was the one who made this post. crazylegs - good post. it seems like both are great... sooooooo right now im trying to think of a way of combinating them.

over the summer when I was 19 years old, i got really ripped. I did a lot of biking. So let's examine one bike ride. It had parts where I didnt have to pedal at all (using momentum), some parts where i had to pedal moderately (flat ground) and some parts where i had to go nuts (hills). doing this over 45-60 minutes, I had a combination of low intensity over long time with high intensity over short period of time... a steady pace with energy bursts. i think that is the key...
 
The Heart rate thing

Hello to all,
I would like to respond to the whole HR staying low for a longer period of time. As a fitness coach that has been in the trenches for over 18 years and owned a club of 10. 1st, unless the machines are maintained well and there is good skin contact with the recievers, they are not accurate all the time. 2nd, I always the most accurate way is to learn to check your own heart rate. I know this can be difficult, so I usually suggest a Polar Heart rate monitor. I have found them to be the most accurate out of all the monitors. Third, I still use ACSM's Karvoen formula to to find people's training zones.( 220 - age -resting hr. Then x by 50% and add back in your resting hr. This will be your lower zone. Take the first figure again and x by 85% and add back in your resting heart rate. This will give you your upper zone.) It is important to note that this is for aerobic conditioning. Your heart rate can go above 85% when you enter the anaerobic zone. 4th, the stationary bike has the lowest caloric burn of any aerobic equipment. I would choose another activity or cross train the bike with something else.
5th, Is a question . Do you need to lower your body fat? If it the answer is yes, then I congradulate you for exercising you are a head of the game. If the answer is no, I still congradulate you for exercising. But I think you focusing on conditioning and trying new activites that will be more challenging. The important point is your exercising and burning calories. People tend to get caught up in ,"am I burning fat, am I doing cardio, etc" People have lost the FUN FACTOR in exercise. The biggest problem people have with exercise is consistancy. Try this program on for fun.

20 body weight squats
1 minute on the bike
10-20 stability ball push ups
2 minutes on the Eliptical
10-20 medicine ball wood chops
1 minute jump rope
10 lateral lunges
2 minute light jog on the treadmill
10-20 bent over rows standing on one leg
2 minute on the step
10-20 medicine ball circles
1 minute jumping jacks
10-20 rotational shoulder press
3 minutes on the eliptical
10-20 dumbell upper cuts
2 minutes of shadow boxing
20-50 floor bicycles

I guarantee you will have fun and burn some calories.
All the best. Burn With Kearns
 
that made the most sense of all!

OK, I finally get it ... using the formula provided above (THANK YOU) my low is 120 and my high is 156. I'm happy to know that I'm in that range when on the treadmill. I think I just need to boost up the time, even though my gym says limit of 30 minutes. (Hey, if nobody is waiting for a machine, why the heck not.) Thanks again for making some sense of all that HR stuff. :) Anne
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top