Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
When I got to their first recommendation, "The best method for burning fat at a higher percentage is a steady, consistent workout in Zone 2 (60-69% max heart rate), the fat burning zone," I didn't have to read any further. Is the purpose of exercise to burn fat? If you want to burn fat, than eat less. You should run, swim, bike, etc. for the cardiovascular effect. If you are capable of doing cardio at higher heart rates, than you should. When I trained with a HR monitor, I would run on easy days at 70% max. HR using the Karvonen Formula, which takes into consideration individual differences in max. and resting HR. If I trained at 60-69% max. HR, I would be walking at a fast pace.
The bottom line is that any advantage in burning fat from training at a lower HR is going to be negligible and you are going to lose the cardiovascular benefit. Anyone who is capable of training harder, but trains at a lower HR to burn fat is losing much of the benefits of the time they are spending exercising. It is like the people who lift very light weights because they only want to tone and not get huge muscles.
When I got to their first recommendation, "The best method for burning fat at a higher percentage is a steady, consistent workout in Zone 2 (60-69% max heart rate), the fat burning zone," I didn't have to read any further. Is the purpose of exercise to burn fat? If you want to burn fat, than eat less. You should run, swim, bike, etc. for the cardiovascular effect. If you are capable of doing cardio at higher heart rates, than you should. When I trained with a HR monitor, I would run on easy days at 70% max. HR using the Karvonen Formula, which takes into consideration individual differences in max. and resting HR. If I trained at 60-69% max. HR, I would be walking at a fast pace.
The bottom line is that any advantage in burning fat from training at a lower HR is going to be negligible and you are going to lose the cardiovascular benefit. Anyone who is capable of training harder, but trains at a lower HR to burn fat is losing much of the benefits of the time they are spending exercising. It is like the people who lift very light weights because they only want to tone and not get huge muscles.
I tried just skimming through it and I read this:
Quote:
4. In order to become better at endurance workouts, get your Forrest Gump on and go as far as humanly possible. Try to drive your heart rate higher than James Franco was in Pineapple Express. If you are going less than ten miles a day on your workouts, might as well throw in the towel and try your hand at knitting.
yeah, i don't see how training at 60-69% of your maximum heart rate is going to burn more fat than at a higher percentage. it might be psychological, but the more that i sweat, the more i that i feel that i have got out of my workout.
most times, i am at 87-92% of my max. when i do interval, it is more like 80-90%
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
