Optimum Hart Rate for fat burning

[manutd2465]

My wife is doing a lot of regular exercise in order to reduce her weight (I think she looks great), what is the best heart rate zone to burn fat rather than cardiovascular training. She is a 29 year old female.

[nigella]

what does heart rate have to do with fat burning? the heart only ensures adequate blood and oxygen supply to the necessary organs by increasing supply if needed. burning fat requires muscle training and a sensible diet, so that the body uses its own supply of energy (fat).

[mrknowall]

im sure its 120-138 check the web page out
http://www.fatburnzone.com/

[Bigeye74]

nigella - Fat burning is dependent on your heartrate. The energy suppl mechanism your body uses depends on the amount of effort you are putting in.
All heart rate ranges are particular to the individual.
Also check out www.polar.fi. Some of their products will guide you through a fitness test that leads to a target heart rate for fatburning.
Without an HRM, performing an exercise for more than 30 mins at a pace that just allows you to keep a conversation going is supposed to do the trick.

[Loosehead]

The "fat burning" Zone is between 65-80 percent of max heart rate, Max HR is 220-age. That range does use fat whilst actually training but to use more fat get your HR in the Cardio improvement zone for at least 20 mins, that is 80+ percent of MaxHR, this burns more fat after by improving CV fitness, and encouraging the body to use fat long after exercise stops by rasing the metabolic rate. This in turn creates a fitness cycle with fit CV system that demand more energy even at rest. Fat burning is better than nothing but for real progress 20+ mins of CV per day at 80% Max HR or better is the way to go.

[nigella]

Bigeye, I only know anatomy and physiology of the body and the heart and dont know much about fitness training, thats why i asked, i was hoping sqad would answer, he's very knowledgeable although, your's and looseheads answers are fab, i've definately learnt something today!

can i ask then, is there anyway of monitoring heart rate other than in the gym, i hate gyms, i get bored so i prefer other things like karate and running, etc. but i've recently been helping my sister in law lose weight, she's rather overweight and conscious of going the gym so i take her out almost running, hopefully leading to running soon. i'd like to be able to monitor heart rate, is this possible?

[Loosehead]

Nigella, there are plenty of prortable heart rate monitors, usually a chest strap connected to a watch. But you don't really need one. As a general rule if you can hold a converstaion whilst running/cycling etc then you are just below the CV improvement zone.

[nigella]

thanks loosehead, i can manage conversations during exercise, but my sis-in-law can hardly manage one while walking fast! she's a size 26, and is reluctant to tell me her weight.

i've been doing a bit of research on heart rate and fat burning, and have found something interesting, apparantly there is a formula to determine maximum aerobic heart rate, is there any truth in this formula? here's the link

http://www.duathlon.com/articles/1460

[Loosehead]

Yes in my first answer, Max HR is 220-age. So if she's 35 then her max rate is 185 and 80% of that is 148. If she cannot talk while walking then that's good enough, her heart rate will be way up there. The fitter someone is the harder they have to work to raise the heart rate and that of course works in reverse. So if you sis-in-law only needs a brisk walk to reach 80% MaxHR then fine it works for her, as she get's fitter she'll need to break into a jog!

[alijangra]

I use a Concept 2 rower daily, and as most have already said heart rate is very important in relation to fat burning, in fact it is the most important aspect of my training and I have managed to get it down to a fine art in relation to my target strokes per minute. Brilliant answers from loosehead.

[nigella]

ah, i see, its all starting to make sense.
she's 25, so i take it her max hr is around 156,

thank you loosehead, i appreciate your imput.

i do hope i can get her jogging eventually, she has been desparate to lose weight for years, and has tried countless times, without success. i hope i can use this info to help her burn fat, and maybe one day she'll be able to accompany me jogging.

[Loosehead]

nearly her max HR is 220-25=195, her cardio training zone is 156+ Her Fat burning zone is 117 to 155. The MaxHR is a theoretical limit, noone is expected to reach it.Good luck. Just got back from the Gym myself incidentally!

[Bigeye74]

The 220 - your age formula is very rough. If your want to get your zones bang on you need to measure both your resting and max heart rate. Something called the Conconi (?) test will get your maximum HRT, though i'd check with the doc before pushing yourself.
Nigella, I'm sorry if my reply was abrupt, I was very rude.

[Loosehead]

I'm talking about a general rule of thumb, not the individual finer points.

[Gef]

The only way to "burn" fat is to consume fewer calories than you need. Simple science.

[Bigeye74]

Gef - actual science has proven that there are more efficient ways of burning fat.

[Loosehead]

As is often the case gef's attempt at being dismissive in a sensible discussion actually demonstrates what an ignorant numpty he his.

Yes eating fewer calories than you use is the final equation however the body will not use fat as a first choice, you see the body's in built survival mechanism tells it to hang on to the fat so muscle will be used. Only certain conditions will induce the body to use fat. Steady low intensity exercise is one another is creating a very smally daily deficit. Big calories deficit = muscle used not fat, bad, very bad. Try again Gef

[Gef]

Loosehead is wrong. The body first exhausts its stores of carbohydrate then it turns to fat. It only uses protein (muscle) as a last resort.

[Loosehead]

OK gef, revel in your ignorance, why is it then possible to be underweight and over fat? Just a thought.

[Bigeye74]

Gef, by arguing are you saying that all optimum heart rate ranges are incorrect or just that the stated optimum 'fat burning' range is a fallacy?