Target Heart Rate. . . . The Myth

I know I'm going to ruffle some more feathers out there by posting this, but hey, I'm here to help you get real information that will help you make choices and take actions that will get results! 

I'm not here to just tell you what you want to hear.  No, I want you to hear the truth, with evidence, and be able to make an informed choice from there.

I realize that will not necessarily make me the most exciting or popular person out there.  But for those brave enough and serious enough about making changes in their bodies, by getting out of pain or transforming their body -- those people will appreciate this post.

I recently received this question that made me realize how many people out there are still using the heart rate info on machines as guides on how to transform their bodies.  So let me give the truth.

In reference to the heart rate ranges posted on exercise equipment.  They identify what your targeted heart rate should be if you want to burn fat, etc. based on your age.  In my case, my heart rate while exercising is ALWAYS higher than that "fat burn" range. I would have to significantly slow down my pace in order to fall within that range.  If my heart rate is not within that range, am I not burning calories efficiently?  Is there a lot of merit to those targeted heart rate ranges?  If I am not sweating, I don't feel like I am working hard. -- Nikkie

Target Heart is highly flawed.  I have personal experience with contacting the user of some of these formulas and they had no real idea why they used them accept to say, "They were the popular tools used at the time".  Guess it really doesn't answer why once they see the flaw they continue to use antiquated information.

To the point.

• Target heart rate is inaccurate for 70% of the population by 10-12 beats per minute.  Not such a big deal right.  But get this, for 30% of the population it's off by 20-24 beats per minute.  That is a big deal.  Knowing which group you fall into can only be found by using your own heart rate monitor.

• The Fat burning zone is supposed be the heart rate range where you will supposedly burn the most fat calories.  Truth is, it cannot predict this.  At best it can only partially suggest a percentage of use of fat, carbohydrates and protein.

• You burn the most fat at rest.  The more intense an exercise is, the more carbohydrates will be used as the primary fuel source.

Low Intensity - 60-65% MHR High Intensity - 80-85% MHR Total Calories expended per min. 4.86 6.86

Fat Calories expended per min. 2.43 2.7

Total Calories expended in 30 min. 46 206

Total Fat calories expended in 30 min. 73 82

Percentage of fat calories burned 50% 39.85%

From The 24/5 Complete Personal Training Manual, 24 Hour Fitness, 2000

I think this chart simply and accurately explains why using intervals (alternating periods of fast and slow) instead of the steady state "fat burning zone" cardio, is the most effective way to shed body fat quickly and effectively.

Slow, steady state cardio just doesn't cut it when it comes to losing body fat quickly and effectively.  Not to mention the wear and tear on the knees, hips, and lower back.

And this is the part that everyone seems to forget so readily -- what happens after that intense exercise circuit you just finished, or that extremely challenging cardio interval session.  There's something called EPOC.  Which basically discusses the amount of calories being burned after an intense session of training that can last up to 3 days later.

You will be burning more calories after intense training session because your resting metabolic rate is higher (you won't get that from "fat burning zone" cardio).  And if you'll remember, when do you use fat as the main source of fuel -- AT REST!

And if that wasn't enough information to convince you, check out this article The Final Nail in the Cardio Coffin pt 2.

Get On Track and Stay on Track!

Here Are Your Final 2 Reasons To . . .

Since this is the last Monday of the month, these will be my final two research articles to help you finally abandon steady state cardio.

As you'll remember we've already discussed the negatives of steady state cardio:

• the amount of time it takes each week to get in all those hours

• the wear and tear toll it takes on your knees, hips and back

• the fact that it does not burn body fat efficiently and effectively for the time you spend

If that wasn't enough for the month, guess what else I found to help you that will help you get in shape quickly and effectively?

So what else works better than steady state cardio?  Well for one weight lifting circuits. Weight lifting circuits have been found to burn more fat and overall calories effectively.

A study was done on the "Effects of resistance vs. aerobic training combined with an 800 calorie liquid diet on lean body mass and resting metabolic rate".

Now for sure 800 calories is a ridiculously low amount of calories to consume (I would not suggest you try this).  But again it was for the purpose of research.  Surely no plan, no matter how well thought out, could produce any results on such a low amount of intake calories right?

Effects of resistance vs. aerobic training combined with an 800 calorie liquid diet on lean body mass and resting metabolic rate

Wrong!!

Aerobic group: 4 hours per week
Resistance training group: 2-4 sets of 8-15 reps. 10 exercises, three times per week.

• VO2 max increased equally in both groups (think better utilization of oxygen)

• The resistance training group lost significantly more fat and did not lose any lean body mass (LBM), even at only 800 calories per day.

• The resistance training group actually increased metabolism compared to the aerobic group which decreased metabolism.

Plain and simple.  Even consuming only 800 calories, lifting weights can actually increase your metabolism (think burn more calories just sitting at your desk).  Why is that important?  Because the more muscle you have and maintain, the easier it is to lose weight and keep it off.  Starvation diets deplete your body and cause your metabolism to slow down -- making it harder to lose weight.

One more for the road.

Contribution of anaerobic energy expenditure to whole body thermogenesis

A weight training circuit burned 71% more calories than originally thought using aerobic measures

8 minutes of weight training burned somewhere between 159 and 231 calories (used a 15 repetition scheme)

To put it plainly, you can burn a heck of a lot more calories doing a weight lifting circuit than doing steady state cardio.

So at this point, to be quite blunt and to the point, with so many options to doing steady state cardio, there are really only 4 reasons I can think of as to why you should be doing steady state:

1.)  Your treating physician has advised you to do steady state cardio

2.)  You have recently started exercising (less than 6 months on a consistent exercise routine)

3.)  You have a body fat composition that is below 10%

4.)  You have lots of free time and nothing better to do

So there you have it.  A month's worth of research on the reasons why steady state cardio doesn't work, as well as some options to try. 

Make this year, your year.  No more excuses, only results.

Get on Track and Stay on Track!

Since Slow Doesn't Work, Try This

TGIF!!!

If you checked in with me on Monday you got a great peak at what's to come for rest of the fitness world in the coming months. 

No More Steady State Cardio.  It simply doesn't give you enough bang for the buck.

If you're serious about getting rid of body fat and getting seriously lean; you now know that spending hours on any cardio machine and expecting it to transform your body, is being naive.  The research is just not supporting that idea.  Now if you have a significantly low body fat, that may be another story.  But for the majority of the people out there -- no more slow cardio.

But of course the next question ends up being, So what do I do now?  So many people have been doing steady state cardio for so long they have no idea where to go from there.  Now if you'll remember I discussed with you on Monday the idea of doing intervals.  Not rocket science by any stretch of the imagination, but man does it get results. 

However, if you're looking to get completely off of the cardio machines and try something new, check out this short clip of me getting my behind kicked with Battle Ropes (this video picks up at round 7).  Because of the nature of Battling Ropes they provide plenty of variety regarding the different movements you can do.  And WOW, talk about jacking up the heart rate and getting a total body workout -- without the banging on the joints (think hip and knee trauma from too much running).  I can't thank Jerry and Gus enough for the opportunity to work with them and get my feet wet on this experience.

There are so many ways to change it up.  Keep the variety.  I'll help with a few more videos in the coming Fridays.  Bottom line -- stop wasting time doing something that doesn't work.  More studies on the way on Monday to give you more reasons to abandon the steady state cardio theory.

Here is an idea for a little change. You might even get a little chuckle out of me getting pushed.

It's time to Get on Track and Stay on Track!

It's Time to Set The Record Straight

I hope you had a great weekend, and gave yourself a chance to recharge your batteries.

I just spent an amazing weekend at a seminar that has completely supported, with peer reviewed research, all the the benefits, ideas and training methods my clients have been receiving for years.  But the really interesting thing is that study after study continued to show that steady state aerobics/cardio, is not effective in losing body fat quickly. Unless you have an unusually low body fat, long slow cardio (steady state) will not work effectively in getting rid of body fat quickly or effectively.

Don't believe me?  Check out the link below.

The addition of 45 minutes of aerobic exercise at 78% Max Heart Rate 5 days a week for 12 weeks had NO EFFECT over dieting alone.

Great, so what does it mean you ask? 

It means if you're spending hour after hour on a treadmill or other cardio machine and not doing intervals, you are wasting a lot of time and not getting near the benefits you could get if you stepped it up a bit and did intervals on your chosen machine.

I know, I know.  We've all been told for years that all you had to do was get on your favorite cardio machine and bang out an hour and you'll see results after such and such amount of time.  Well the research is in and it does not support that theory.  To be quite honest I haven't believed in steady state (long slow cardio) for quite some time based on my own personal experiences with myself and my clientele.  If you're just starting out it's a great way to start doing your cardio, but after approximately 6-8 weeks and with no significant health issues, you should really be doing intervals whenever you do cardio.

So what are intervals?  Simple. It just means alternating periods of intense cardio followed by periods of slower cardio.  If you walk during your slow periods, walk faster during the intense periods.  If you jog during the slow, jog faster during the intense periods.  It simply means alternating light cardio with intense cardio periods.  How long should each period be?  When you first start do 30 seconds intense followed by 45 seconds of lighter/slower cardio.  Continue this alternating process until you have completed 5-12 minutes.  From there you would slowly progress upward to longer periods of intense followed by shorter periods of slow.  Be sure to get your doctor's permission. This type of cardio is no joke.

Ok.  So maybe you're thinking that the 12 week period wasn't really long enough to show the beneficial effects of steady state cardio.  Believe me, I thought the same thing.

Then the presenter hit us with this.

A six month study was done between two groups.  One group was diet only and the second group was diet plus aerobic exercise (50 minutes, 5 days per week).  That should certainly show the significant benefits of doing cardio using the belief of slow steady state, right?

Wrong?

Still not a believer?  Check out the link below.

Six month Study of two groups.  One diet only the other diet plus aerobic exercise.

So what were the findings?  Plain and simple, no additional effects of aerobic exercise on body composition.

Please believe me when I tell you that numerous hands went up to explain their story of what they experienced.  The presenter did an outstanding job of explaining what was really at work in those "success stories". Then he went on to provide numerous other studies that continued to show the ineffectiveness of steady state/slow cardio for those serious about getting rid of body fat quickly and effectively.

So what do you do that works.  Well for one, try using intervals during your cardio training sessions and see the results.  In addition you should check back next week when I'll share with you what the studies say works to help you get rid of that stubborn body fat quickly and effectively.

See you next week for the real deal.

Get on Track and Stay on Track!