2001/09/04, 07:00 AM
I am 20, and have been told in the past that my target heart rate is between 160 and 180, whilst jogging. However the artlcle with the rate caculation suggests 110 - 140. Which is best considering I want to loose fat and keep muscle?
Cheers Jon
|
|
|
2001/09/04, 07:14 PM
I think that both are because it dependson what past you are jogging at.
|
2001/09/05, 05:06 AM
My understanding was that fitter people will have to work harder to reach their target rate lets say 170, it dosent take me long however to reach it. I thought it was the heart rate not the pace that improved fat burning conditions?
|
2001/09/09, 08:31 PM
I could be wrong, but I do believe that the higher your heart rate the better... within reason. Personally, I find it next to impossible to keep my heart rate below 160 when doing my typical aerobics. I do know that for the purpose of burning fat, you have to keep you heart rate high continuously. The reason for this is that your body stores enough glycogen to get you through a 30minute aerobic workout. For every minute past 30, your body converts its fat stores to glycogen to fuel your muscles. This is why most "fat burn" programs on your aerobic machines last 45minutes. I try to do this 4 times a week, but as of late, I have been training for an upcoming physical readiness test. For the last 3 weeks I have not lifted many weights, but have run 1.5miles or more 4 times a week. As soon as I beat this PRT, I'm gonna be doing 45minutes per day on the eliptical trainer with some weights thrown into the mix.
-Jim
|