A Weightloss and diet forum. WeightLossBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » WeightLossBanter forum » alt.support.diet newsgroups » Low Carbohydrate Diets
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

questions about cardio training (frequences, intensity, etc...)



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 9th, 2004, 02:20 PM
Hueyduck
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default questions about cardio training (frequences, intensity, etc...)

Hi everyone,

I just bought a device to measure my heart rate monitor, and I find it
so much fun to be able to see precisely how effective my activity is.
Anyway, I have some questions for the cardiotraining specialists out the

- for those who took the time (and spent the money) to check their
*real* maximal heart rate, did you find a big difference between the
results and the theoric "220-age" number ?

- The instruction manual of my monitor says that in orderto use fat, you
need to be between 60 and 70 bpm. They say it is a light to moderate
effort. Is there any real proportion between heart rate beating and
calorie burned ? I guess so but it's not so obvious to me.

Thanks for your answers and have a nice evening.


Huey

============================================
Huey / started LC October 27th 2002
(1.74 m) 5ft 8 inch tall
lbs : 234 / 186 / 147 (-47) mini-goal : 182 lbs by August 20th 2004
kg : 106.4 / 84.9 / 67 (-21) mini-goal : 83 kg by August 20th 2004
===========================================

  #2  
Old August 9th, 2004, 02:34 PM
Penelope Baker
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default questions about cardio training (frequences, intensity, etc...)


"Hueyduck" wrote in message
...
Hi everyone,

I just bought a device to measure my heart rate monitor, and I find it


snip


- The instruction manual of my monitor says that in orderto use fat, you
need to be between 60 and 70 bpm.


It says 60 and 70 *PERCENT* of your max heartrate, not bpm :-) HUGE diff :P

Peace,
Pen
--
Pawbreakers - The Candy for Cats!
http://www.pawbreakers.com


  #3  
Old August 9th, 2004, 03:07 PM
Hueyduck
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default questions about cardio training (frequences, intensity, etc...)



Penelope Baker wrote:

- The instruction manual of my monitor says that in orderto use fat, you
need to be between 60 and 70 bpm.



It says 60 and 70 *PERCENT* of your max heartrate, not bpm :-) HUGE diff :P


Sure. I absolutely understood that . I just made a mistake typing the
message.
Actually, I know that the best rate to lose fat is 113 to 132 bpm for me.

Thanks anyway for pointing this mistyping :-)

Huey

  #4  
Old August 9th, 2004, 03:07 PM
Hueyduck
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default questions about cardio training (frequences, intensity, etc...)



Penelope Baker wrote:

- The instruction manual of my monitor says that in orderto use fat, you
need to be between 60 and 70 bpm.



It says 60 and 70 *PERCENT* of your max heartrate, not bpm :-) HUGE diff :P


Sure. I absolutely understood that . I just made a mistake typing the
message.
Actually, I know that the best rate to lose fat is 113 to 132 bpm for me.

Thanks anyway for pointing this mistyping :-)

Huey

  #5  
Old August 9th, 2004, 06:41 PM
billydee
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default questions about cardio training (frequences, intensity, etc...)

Hueyduck wrote in message ...
Hi everyone,

I just bought a device to measure my heart rate monitor, and I find it
so much fun to be able to see precisely how effective my activity is.
Anyway, I have some questions for the cardiotraining specialists out the

- for those who took the time (and spent the money) to check their
*real* maximal heart rate, did you find a big difference between the
results and the theoric "220-age" number ?


YES


- The instruction manual of my monitor says that in orderto use fat, you
need to be between 60 and 70 bpm. They say it is a light to moderate
effort. Is there any real proportion between heart rate beating and
calorie burned ? I guess so but it's not so obvious to me.


you burn a higher PERCENTAGE of fat to glucose at that level, but at
higher intensities you burn more overall calories.

Thanks for your answers and have a nice evening.


Huey

============================================
Huey / started LC October 27th 2002
(1.74 m) 5ft 8 inch tall
lbs : 234 / 186 / 147 (-47) mini-goal : 182 lbs by August 20th 2004
kg : 106.4 / 84.9 / 67 (-21) mini-goal : 83 kg by August 20th 2004
===========================================

  #6  
Old August 9th, 2004, 06:41 PM
billydee
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default questions about cardio training (frequences, intensity, etc...)

Hueyduck wrote in message ...
Hi everyone,

I just bought a device to measure my heart rate monitor, and I find it
so much fun to be able to see precisely how effective my activity is.
Anyway, I have some questions for the cardiotraining specialists out the

- for those who took the time (and spent the money) to check their
*real* maximal heart rate, did you find a big difference between the
results and the theoric "220-age" number ?


YES


- The instruction manual of my monitor says that in orderto use fat, you
need to be between 60 and 70 bpm. They say it is a light to moderate
effort. Is there any real proportion between heart rate beating and
calorie burned ? I guess so but it's not so obvious to me.


you burn a higher PERCENTAGE of fat to glucose at that level, but at
higher intensities you burn more overall calories.

Thanks for your answers and have a nice evening.


Huey

============================================
Huey / started LC October 27th 2002
(1.74 m) 5ft 8 inch tall
lbs : 234 / 186 / 147 (-47) mini-goal : 182 lbs by August 20th 2004
kg : 106.4 / 84.9 / 67 (-21) mini-goal : 83 kg by August 20th 2004
===========================================

  #7  
Old August 9th, 2004, 08:20 PM
Hueyduck
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default questions about cardio training (frequences, intensity, etc...)



billydee wrote:

- for those who took the time (and spent the money) to check their
*real* maximal heart rate, did you find a big difference between the
results and the theoric "220-age" number ?



YES


Thanks for your answer. Could you give us number. Like the theoric
number and the real thing after having been to the doc.

Thanks again.

Huey

  #8  
Old August 9th, 2004, 08:20 PM
Hueyduck
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default questions about cardio training (frequences, intensity, etc...)



billydee wrote:

- for those who took the time (and spent the money) to check their
*real* maximal heart rate, did you find a big difference between the
results and the theoric "220-age" number ?



YES


Thanks for your answer. Could you give us number. Like the theoric
number and the real thing after having been to the doc.

Thanks again.

Huey

  #9  
Old August 9th, 2004, 08:20 PM
Hueyduck
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



billydee wrote:

- for those who took the time (and spent the money) to check their
*real* maximal heart rate, did you find a big difference between the
results and the theoric "220-age" number ?



YES


Thanks for your answer. Could you give us number. Like the theoric
number and the real thing after having been to the doc.

Thanks again.

Huey

  #10  
Old August 10th, 2004, 12:56 PM
Hannah Gruen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default questions about cardio training (frequences, intensity, etc...)

"billydee" wrote

you burn a higher PERCENTAGE of fat to glucose at that level, but at
higher intensities you burn more overall calories.


That's right. I read a good post from Lyle MacDonald once that addressed
this subject. Maybe Huey could find it by doing a Google search. At any
rate, he pretty much shot out of the water the concept of exercising at
certain rates in order to "burn more fat".

True that you burn different proportions of fat to glucose depending on
various factors including exercise intensity and duration, but the bottom
line is to use up energy (calories) via any permutation of exercise in order
to hopefully create or increase a negative calorie balance. That's what
actually causes fat loss over a period of days, weeks etc. In other words,
burn more calories and you'll lose more fat, assuming food intake stays the
same.

Besides which, if you're doing a ketogenic low-carb diet, you don't have all
that much stored glucose anyhow and will be burning mostly fat regardless of
intensity.

HG


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Is Atkins + cardio & weight training enough to lower BF%... GroupRateNOT! Low Carbohydrate Diets 16 June 14th, 2004 10:31 PM
Top 5 Exercise Questions I Fraigun General Discussion 5 April 20th, 2004 02:19 AM
Top 5 Exercise Questions I Fraigun Low Carbohydrate Diets 5 April 20th, 2004 02:19 AM
cardio vs weight training determined General Discussion 9 April 6th, 2004 04:24 PM
couple questions about weight training Marsha Low Carbohydrate Diets 29 January 28th, 2004 02:46 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:49 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 WeightLossBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.