My co-workers have noticed that I'm hitting the gym during my lunch hour (I guess coming back to work with my hair up and all sweaty kinda gives it away) and some of the guys have been offering me unsolicited workout advice.
One co-worker told me that he thinks I'm working in my cardio range (160-170 heart rate) and that cardio, while good for your heart, only works the immediate energy (what you ate that day) and won't do anything for the stored energy (fat). He suggested that I work in an aerobic range (130-140) for 45min - 60 min to burn stored fat. He also said I should be burning at least 450 calories per workout. (I usually burn 300-400 per workout, plus weights)
Has anyone ever heard that in order to burn stored fat, you must workout in aerobic range and not cardio range?
According to Michael Thruman (6 Week Body Makeover) what you co worker says is ture. I think MT says to work out at 65-85% of your maximum heart rate to burn stored body fat. i don't remember him saying you have to burn a set number of calories in any time frame. He does suggest that you work out at that rate for 45 minutes to an hour.....
you wrote: He suggested that I work in an aerobic range (130-140) for 45min - 60 min to burn stored fat.
I have heard the same thing, from several different sources, within the past year or so. It has been the hardest thing for me to get used to, because years ago, the advice I heard (also from several sources!) was that you should be going at a fast enough pace that you can't really hold a conversation comfortably. Anything slower, and you're not getting your heart rate high enough to do much good.
But lately, all Ive been hearing is that, for maximum fat burning, you're going too fast if you can't hold a conversation. On John Basedow's video (which I didnt like, btw -- details later, if anyone wants info), he says that if youre working so hard that you can't really hold a conversation, your body could be burning muscle for energy instead of fat.
Well, obviously, I dont want to do that. But I'll tell you, for years and years now, my head has associated that out-of-breath-but-still-running feeling with success and accomplishment and it goes completely against my natural instinct to ignore it. I do want to burn fat, that is my priority right now, but I dont know if I will ever be able to 'retrain' myself to keep my heart rate down, instead of continuing to run just because i still can and it isnt killing me yet (which is what, to me, equals accomplishment).
Congrats on the good work, and good luck with your workouts, Berlin (and everyone) :0)
I agree with lilith that I always thought the harder I worked the better. Then with the new rules from MT, it was also hard for me to slow down. The way I did that is by taking my heart rate every five minutes (at first) to make sure I wasn't working 'too hard' After awhile I got use to working at the corrcte heart rate and matter of fact, I actually 'enjoy' it more. It makes it possible to look at magizines, talk or just day dream, which is a pretty cool way to combat the stored body fat!
Has anyone ever heard that in order to burn stored fat, you must workout in aerobic range and not cardio range?
Hmm, I've never heard of a distinction between 'aerobic range' and 'cardio range' -- since 'aerobic' exercise is just another name for 'cardiorespiratory' exercise (or cardio, as most people call it). However, some people (and machines) do distinguish a 'cardio zone' from a 'fat-burning zone' - could that be what your co-workers are talking about?
In any event, I was taught that 'cardio' versus 'fat-burning' zones are a myth. What counts in the end are the number of CALORIES that you burn -- since calories are simply stored fat. When you burn through 3500 calories of stored fat, you've lost a pound. And the faster you go, the more calories you burn.
I lost my weight doing cardio as fast as possible - usually between 80 and 90% of my max heart rate. Obviously, opinions are all over the place on this one, but just like for Lilith, it never made sense for me to slow down.
Thanks for those links Meg -- this is one of the most persistent, hardest to kill fitness myths out there. I like Michael Thurman mostly, but it really burns me that he continues to promote this, especially since he has such a platform on Extreme Makeover.
Calories In, Calories Out ... Calories In, Calories Out ... *sigh*
cardio, while good for your heart, only works the immediate energy (what you ate that day) and won't do anything for the stored energy (fat)
Isn't that really saying that you're using up the food you ate instead of letting it accumulate on your thighs later? Sounds like skipping the middle man to me.
If you are trying to use up all the money in your bank account is it better to take your paycheck and deposit it and then make a withdrawal later or cash your check and use the money before you ever put it in the bank?
I lost my weight doing cardio as fast as possible - usually between 80 and 90% of my max heart rate. Obviously, opinions are all over the place on this one,
They sure are! (Thanks for the info, Meg )
Berlin, your post sent me to Google where I thought Id do a few searches and see if I could figure out the 'real deal' concerning the fat burning zone (aka the aerobic zone) vs the cardio zone, as well as figure out what my target heart rate should be during a workout. Check out this link: http://exercise.about.com/cs/cardiow.../aa022601a.htm
Excerpt: The Ugly Truth
The body does burn a higher percentage of calories from fat when involved in lower intensity cardio exercise. BUT, at higher intensities, you burn a greater number of overall calories which is what you should be concerned about when trying to lose weight.
So, basically, even though you specifically burn more *fat* cals doing the lower heart rate workout, you still burn a higher total number of cals with your usual 'cardio zone' workout. And if you look at the chart they show, this includes fat cals! So, we should just do what seems sensible, and continue doing the more challenging workout, right? ......... apparently not. reading further and following some of the links, it seems to be a good idea to work these lower-intensity workouts into your routine.
As for how often, I have no idea. I got a teeny bit discouraged and gave up. But, I do think Im going to change my routine a bit, and maybe this is something you might want to consider as well: right now, i run a course that is approximately 2 miles (i should probably drive it once, to see exactly how long it is..). It includes a lot of good-sized hills, and right now my fitness level is such that i can only jog about half of it before i need to start walking for short intervals. I think the whole thing takes me right around a half hour to complete -- I keep forgetting to wear my watch but today/tonight ill make sure i do so i know for sure. Anyway, when im finished with that i usually feel like im completely finished for the day. i know i should add strength training but im just not ready for that yet.. so, since you need to stay in the 'fat burning' zone for at least an hour, i think what im going to do, starting today, is to finish my little workout (which for me, is a big workout :0)) by walking for another half hour in that fat burning zone. this will actually be a nice way to warm down, with a relaxing walk where im actually not *supposed* to be pushing myself too hard. and maybe when im done ill finally start adding the push-ups, lunges and squats i keep promising myself ill start doing.
Sorry this got so long, but, whew, it sure can get confusing. Hopefully we can all find a way to get an effective workout while implementing all of the useful info out there.
Funniegrrl - "Thanks for those links Meg -- this is one of the most persistent, hardest to kill fitness myths out there. I like Michael Thurman mostly, but it really burns me that he continues to promote this, especially since he has such a platform on Extreme Makeover."
Regarding Michael Thruman, he also states that to follow 6 Wk Body Makeover you don't have to give up anything. That is utter nonsense, I was a type B and I had to give up red meat, dairy, alot of carbs and salt. Everytime I see him on TV advertising how easy his plan is I want to scream.....
Meg - Now thanks to you I can throw out his claim about 'the secret fat burning zone' Well I guess that means I have to speed up on that treadmill again. I should have known it was too good to be true....lol
I've been thinking about this thread since I first read it this morning. I do not have an answer.
But it got me to thinking and now I'm trying to turn my nebulous thoughts into what I mean.
I'm a detail person. I love figuring, planning, charting, statistics ... But when it comes right down to it, I know that in order to lose weight I must eat less and move more. Less calories in and more calories out.
I have, over a couple of years, read mountains of material regarding health and weightloss. But I've been able to distill this knowledge down into a workable paragraph or two.
Once, a gal at work asked how I was losing weight. Fifteen or twenty minutes later ... her eyes rolled back in her head, glazed over. She's not lost one pound and has never asked me again.
I have gone to other message boards. On one there's a gal who for about two and a half years has been asking questions like this one. The difference between heart-rate zones ... fast carbs/slow carbs ... weight training versus cardio ... exactly how many pounds a month do the other posters lose ... fat/carb/protein ratios ... do you have to exercise, can it be done with just diet ... do you have to diet, can it be done with just exercise ...walking/jogging ... jogging vs running... outside vs inside... you get the picture?
I wonder why in all that time she has never started anything. She's not lost any weight. She's not any healthier. She's just a couple years older.
Can there be too much information? Even if it's all good and true. Can you logistic and figure and plan yourself right out of action?
Can we be so befuddled by questions like that of Berlin's coworker that we stop, think and stall? "What? You mean all my hard work isn't having the positive effect that I wanted?" How depressing!
Now Berlin seems like a smart enough person. She knows what she's doing. It seems like a healthy plan and it's working. She's obviously far enough into the healthy game to be a knowledgeable player. Her's seems to be an advanced question, from advanced experience. I don't mean to imply that my thoughts are about her. Not at all.
I really worry about beginners. If I had read some of the 'irrefutable proof' that you had to hit a target heart rate to burn fat ... I never would have started walking. For some folks the best info (maybe the only info) they need is to eat less and move more. Not even what to eat. Not even how to move or how quickly. Just start. Worry about the finer later.
I'm sorry I wrote a short novel, especially since it reads more like a rant. But you see ... I got to thinkin'.
SusanB--Great post! I couldn't agree with you more. The best exercise is the one that you DO and when people give me unsolicited advice about losing weight/working out I just smile and say thank you and let it roll off my back.
SusanB - Very well put and thanks I really needed to hear that
Anyhow, like any other Friday I got up, went to the gym, got on that dang treadmill and 'moved'.......
Right, there is a difference between "more than you had been doing" and "optimal." I think that people DO get caught up in "optimal" to the point that it paralyzes them. That has been true of me in the past. I'd hear that exercising first thing in the morning was "best" because you were more likely to tap into fat stores after fasting all night, that it would rev your metabolism for the rest of the day, etc. Well, I'm not a morning person, but I'd decide I'd exercise in the morning. I could never get up in time, and would say, well, TOMORROW I'll get up. And I wouldn't. So I wouldn't exercise at all because I couldn't do it at the "best" time.
To me, this is another facet of the all-or-nothing thinking a lot of overweight people suffer from. It's the flip side of, "I've already blown my diet today so I might as well pig out." There are so many traps in this line of thinking ... "I ONLY lost a pound this week," etc. If we can't do everything completely absolutely perfectly with no slips whatsoever, and if the weight doesn't fall off at record pace, we are failures and the effort pointless.
So, I don't always assume that someone asking questions like this is trapped in that type of thinking. The idea of continually learning, tweaking your program to adapt to changes and improve, etc. is great. It's what will keep you fit over the long haul. But, it's absolutely true that it's important to remember that ANY effort is worth it, ANY step you take towards a healthier life is a reward in and of itself. If you walk around the block at 2mph today, and that's more exercise than you've gotten in years, then that's progress, and something to be proud of. Keep yourself challenged at a moderate level, but don't get caught up in overthinking things and setting goals that are too lofty for your current fitness and comfort level.
Aerobic vs. Cardio Which helps with stored fat?
kinda gives it away) and some of the guys have been offering me unsolicited workout advice. 
