Tom, all excellent posts above. I have to spread some rep around before I give it to you again, but it was well deserved.

( My apologies in advance if Steve has already touched on this next point elsewhere in the forum )

Just want to make a very minor distinction between your description of training to improve your body's ability to burn fat as fuel and losing fat from doing exercise in general.

To burn fat while exercising, you need to have oxygen. So, if you want to burn more fat while doing cardio you have to train aerobically - which means you can breathe deeply but you don't gasp so you get out of breath ( i.e no oxygen ) while training. Burning fat actually means your body is using ' fat burning enzymes ' to get the energy from fat to meet your body's needs. So, if you think burning - think enzymes. Over time, your body adapts to all this aerobic cardio, so the more you run aerobically, the more your body adapts by creating more fat burning enzymes to burn fat. Doing more and more aerobic training will simply cause you to produce more and more fat burning enzymes. So, your body's ability to burn fat ( i.e because you're producing more enzymes ) gets better and better the more aerobic cardio that you do. And as you pointed out, this aerobic training usually is around 65%-80% +/- MHR.

[ btw - if you DO get out of breath doing cardio, now you're training anaerobically, so you're burning more glucose instead of fat.]

Now, to lose fat, what you need to do is simply create a calorie deficit. You can get that deficit from a combo of adjustments to your diet, with the addition of weight training and the addition of both aerobic cardio & anaerobic cardio. For example, HIIT is anaeorbic exercise that not only burns calories while you exercise but burns calories long afterwards as well. Weight training is also another anaeorbic exercise that burns calories while you exercise & burns calories afterwards.

I suspect Steve has already covered this, but if you want to lose fat, I'd focus more on different ways for your body to optimally burn ' total calories ' per session instead of trying to focus on getting your heart rate into some " fat burning zone/heart-rate " while on the treadmill. " Again, training at " fat burning zone " is a misleading way to got about losing fat.

Steve - I'm sure you've already covered how misleading these cardio " fat burning zones " are in another post somewhere as an fyi for Play2Win. If not, I can paste in another post of mine that goes into this " fat burning zone " into a bit more detail.

If you are exercising at the lower end of the "fat burning range", you won't feel like you are exerting yourself. But you will be working out.

There is a common misbelief that if you are not breathing hard or not sweating, you are not working out hard enough. At a heart rate of 65-70%, it is very possible to carry on a conversation even though the body is physically exerting itself. Maintain that heart rate for 90 or 120 minutes and later in the day, you will feel tired - unless of course, you are in really good shape.

When I was cycling competitively, I would go out for 50-60 mile rides mostly keeping my heart rate at around 70%. It felt good, built strength and burned calories.

The thing about heart rate is that you don't have to know exactly what your max heart rate is to really benefit it. Any of the calculations you mentioned will get you in the ballpark - which for most people is good enough. And as you get in better shape, there are workouts that can be done to get a better estimate of what your max heart rate is.

In five years of competitive cycling, I only hit my max heart rate once. (For those of you who know cycling, it was a points race and I was off the front on a bell lap.) A friend said he never saw anyone grimace so much and it took a considerable amount of time for me to feel like I had control of my breath - then again it was during a race and resting for me was still around 80% of my max heart rate. (And for those of you who are wondering, I ended up helping a teammate win and finishing 6th myself out of about 50 people.)

-Charles

Yes, there are a couple of posts on that very subject in the Index of WLF "Keepers" in this forum.

I have talked about it numerous times. Where the heck were you Wrangell, when I was arguing with some "guru" who was claiming the most optimal way to train is to hit the moderate, fat-burning zone!

It is good information, and always good for people to read again. Thanks.

Just as I suspected.

Bear with me guys....still new to the forum....guess I should of done my homework on which topics Steve has already covered BEFORE I posted.

Hell no you shouldn't do your homework. Don't worry about me Wrangell. I promise, you will not be stepping on my toes. My toes aren't to be stepped on anyhow, this is not MY community.

I repeat myself all of the time on this forum. It's the nature of an internet community. You have new people coming and going all of the time, who need the same information repeated that you already covered last week. I would be glad if you picked up some of the slack.

I like reading your posts too! So post away. I have a feeling that some interesting discussions will take place between the two of us.

well then!
I would consider myself as averagely fit
I may not be the best at endurance tests (wouldn't catch me doing a marathon) but I am very good at short bursts of energy, say sprinting 100m and am not one of those that struggles to make it up the stairs

however I am slightly conserned by my heart rate
at rest it is usually about 90bpm, which I know is rather high
during cardio exercise it will get up to around 185 bpm (which is still within the safe range for my age, but rather high!)

should I be worried about this?
is there a chance it is affecting my ability to lose weight?

..x.

I dont think it's affecting your ability to loose weight at all.

As you increase your cardiac fitness, your heart rate will likely decrease at rest and with activity.

Have you been to the doctor for your regular checkups and mentioned your high resting heart rate? And is there any history in your family of heart conditions? If you're heart is healthy, then I think it just comes down to cardiac fitness.

My resting heart rate has gotten as low as 40 bmp. Not often, but it has been, typically I'm closer to 48-52. I check each night before bed, so typically I've been on the computer for a bit, then brush my teeth, then time for the heart rate check. So, mine is very low, but nothing to worry about for me. Because of my family history of young onset of cardiomyopathy, I have an echocardiogram at a minimum of every 5 years. An extra one this last time with my last pregnancy by my doctors request.

Heart disease is nothing to mess around with though, so definitely check with your doctor to make sure there is no concerns there if you haven't already.

Are you taking any medications? Sometimes those can alter your heart rate, but it is nothing to be alarmed about if you are taking it under the supervision of a doctor.

ermmm regular check-ups?!
never been to one of those, don't think anyone does round here
there's a history of high blood pressure, but thats only in the rather large people so i dont think its hereditory
I take anti inflamitories and the pill but these shouldnt affect it
oh well haha It obviously just works a bit too well

You stated you were concerned. You asked if it was something to worry about.

I think it could be something to worry about.

If it were me, and I were worried about my heart rate, I would speak to my doctor. Especially with such a high resting heart rate. You only have one heart. And getting a new one is not easy. I know, my dad did it nearly 8 years ago.

And I'm here, and I do get regular checkups. My health is not something I want to screw with.

I didn't mean on the forum, I meant in England, or this part of it anyway.
I do realise that heart conditions can be very serious, but as I have not experienced any trouble that I am aware of with my health (of which could be down to a heart condition) then I have not been to my doctor, and was just looking for some friendly advice.

I understand the interval training concept, but I'm not sure how to compare it to high intensity continuous training.

For example, which is better? 1 minute high, 1 minute moderate for 20 minutes, or 20 minutes of 90%? What about 30 minutes of 90%? Is HIIT better because of the increase/decrease in heart rate, or because you are hitting higher levels of intensity because you "max" out?

BTW, I'm 6', 210 lbs, male. I can get my heart rate into the mid 170s and keep it there for 30 minutes without dying.


Any thoughts?

Yay, good question, I'm curious too.