Heart Rate Bands

[[old] copywriter]

All the literature says that you should work long and at a relatively low HR to burn fat. In my case, going by the formula, my fat-burn HR is 100-115 bpm.<br /><br />I made a concscious effort to row at that HR for 60 minutes yesterday. Firstly, it hardly seems like any work at all. Secondly its sooo boring. <br /><br />Normally I prefer to row with my HR in my aerobic band (116-140) and doing that weight has been coming off.<br /><br />If I row at a faster HR am I really burning muscle, not fat?<br /><br />Your input welcome.

[[old] RockinRobin]

<!--QuoteBegin-copywriter+Jun 25 2005, 02:54 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(copywriter @ Jun 25 2005, 02:54 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->All the literature says that you should work long and at a relatively low HR to burn fat. In my case, going by the formula, my fat-burn HR is 100-115 bpm.<br /><br />I made a concscious effort to row at that HR for 60 minutes yesterday. Firstly, it hardly seems like any work at all. Secondly its sooo boring. <br /><br />Normally I prefer to row with my HR in my aerobic band (116-140) and doing that weight has been coming off.<br /><br />If I row at a faster HR am I really burning muscle, not fat?<br /><br />Your input welcome. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />What an excellent question! I've been reading up on the Heart training bands also. One thing to look at first is which formula you are using to determine your HR %. Our gym trainer says the Karvonen formula is more acurate than just the age adjusted formula. This link describes the Karvonen formula: <a href='http://www.sportfit.com/sportfitglossar ... krvnn.html' target='_blank'>http://www.sportfit.com/sportfitglossar ... nn.html</a> Here is an easy Karvonen calculator: <a href='http://www.briancalkins.com/HeartRate.htm' target='_blank'>http://www.briancalkins.com/HeartRate.htm</a><br /><br />You didn't mention what HR% the you were training at 100-115 bpm. If I ventured a guess would that be 50-60% of your maximum HR? I try to train between 70-80% of my maximum heart rate and it seems to have the best effect for weight loss for me. But I do spend a smaller amount of time in the 50-60% usually when warming up or cooling down. And to help out my cardio, I'll usually try to do a short sprint up to 85%. The last two weeks of rowing I have lost 5 lbs.<br /><br />Here is a quote I read "...An example would be a long, slow walk or ride on a stationary bike at about 50 to 60% of maximal heart rate. For a conditioned person, this exercise level could be sustained for at least 4-6 hours. At this level, it would take almost three hours before the body begins to burn more fat than carbohydrates. 2) The body burns fat best by using a much higher-intensity exercise such as running or biking at 70-80% level of maximum heart rate. Using this method, the body begins to burn more fat than carbohydrates after about 18 minutes. Regardless of method used, the body will burn more fat than carbohydrates after exercising. It will do this for up to 6 hours." <br /><br />If you train for an extended time period at a higher intensity eventually the glycogen (carbohydrate) and fat sources will be depleted and then it will start burning muscle.<br /><br />You can read the whole article at: <a href='http://www.womenof.com/Articles/sf_9_22_03.asp' target='_blank'>http://www.womenof.com/Articles/sf_9_22_03.asp</a> which I thought was pretty good for my simple mind. <br /><br />Keep in mind the article talks about someone who is conditioned. For someone who has been sedentary with no exercise, starting out at a lower HR might be the best until the body gets used to exercising for safety's sake. <br /><br />I would love to hear more on this topic also!<br /><br /><br />

[[old] Bayko]

<!--QuoteBegin-copywriter+Jun 25 2005, 07:54 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(copywriter @ Jun 25 2005, 07:54 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--><br />If I row at a faster HR am I really burning muscle, not fat?<br /><br />Your input welcome. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br /><br />This fear keeps cropping up, probably because the fear-mongers are more vocal. But it is an unfounded fear.<br /><br />I've posted some references on the thread "Lightweight Rowing In College" in the Training section. Boiled down to the essence, the important points to keep in mind are these:<br /><br />"The only time body protein as normally used for energy is in the advanced stages of starvation."<br /><br />And,<br /><br />"PROTEIN -- It is well established that protein is not used as a fuel to any appreciable extent when the caloric supply is adequate......Even after exhausting the glycogen depots, continued exercise does not raise the nitrogen excretion significantly. The choice of fuel for the working muscle, therefore, is actually limited to carbohydrate and fat."<br /><br />Your muscles could atrophy if you don't use them, but they won't be burned up by exercise.<br /><br />Oh, and RockinRobin's post is an excellent bit of information. Spot on.<br /><br /><br />Rick<br />

[[old] Xeno]

Hi <br />Here is what I know.<br />If you train at "fat" burning intensity as soon as you stop your exercise you stop burning fat and thus calories.<br />Training at your target heart rate to improve your aerobic capacity which imporves your stamina burns more calories. You have to know that no matter what the intensity is you will always also burn fat simultaniously as burning "carbs".<br />Burning muscle tissue occurs when you have completely emptied your body of fat and carbs. Training too hard also produces an acidosis which breaks down the muscle tissue. <br />There is a middle road. There are bunch of rules of thumb to figure out what the right steady state intensity is. One is that you should be able to speak a sentce with out running out of air immediately. The other is an equation: Karvonen Formula:[(Max heart rate minus rest heart rate)mutiplied by 80%] plus the rest heart rate= your target heart rate at which you can do your longer rows at.<br />In order to avoid getting board mix up the stroke length, stroke rate, row with one arm, one leg etc. The most important is that you bring variety to your rows.<br />I hope this was helpful.<br />XENO<br />

[[old] copywriter]

Thanks for the input, some reassuring stuff.<br /><br />Tonight I could only fit in 50 minutes on the ergo. Did a slow first 5 (2.15 split) to warm up, then upped the rate to 2.10 which gets me to an HR of around 122. Maintain that for 4 minutes, then one minute at 2.00 (pushes HR to about 134) back to 2.10 for 4 minutes and repeat that cycle until 1.5 minutes to go when I just went flat out (about 1.55) ending with HR at 144.<br /><br />A session like that is so much more interesting and satisfying than plugging away at a steady speed keeping HR constant at 'fat-burn' levels.

[[old] LanceH]

Most things that say you burn more fat at a lower heartrate make a few assumptions. Typically the situation is put forward like this:<br />Rowing 10k in 60 minutes burns more calories than rowing 10 in 45 minutes.<br /><br />Depending on the person, this may really be true. But you are comparing fat burn in 45 minutes against fat burn in 60 minutes. It's really not a valid comparison because it neglects what happens in those other 15 minutes for the person that rows fast.<br /><br />Rowing a 2:10 pace for an hour will burn more calories than a 2:30 pace for an hour.<br /><br />The heartrate you workout at for weight loss should generally be a rate that you can sustain for 30+ minutes. The workout should also be such that it will leave you prepared to do your workout tomorrow as well. Consistent high effort being the key to weight loss. And diet...bleh.