220 - age * .70 really??? dang I must be burning muscle then... ?

[tripmachine]

So i was reading to keep my heart rate at 70% of my max for best, most efficient fat burn. 220 - age * .70 = my heart rate I should be at which would mean I'd need to keep it around 133bpm..... That seems awfully low for me. I take adderall prescribed to me by my doctor which probably helps boost my HR and I'm also on a ECA stack so my HR is up there usually... I am only taking the ephedrine twice a day now instead of 3 times a day to try to lower my rate a bit in the evening (gym time)

questions:

1. Is 133 really what it should be at? (usually its up around 155-170)

2. I'm going to start up HIIT for 20 mins post workout.... i would imagine it's going to be really hard to keep a 133bpm rate..... any suggestions?

3. so if i'm up there around 160 I'm burning muscle as well or what? ehh 133 really seems like i won't even break out a sweat!

4. also would 20 mins of HIIT PWO be ok since I know I need my PWO shake pretty quickly after lifting.... is 20 mins ok or is that even going to effect my muscle gain? I'm going to try to get A.M. cardio in but I need to adjust to it first obviously it's going to be another life style change.

Thanks everyone!

[Pac Man]

That's right, faster is not necessarily better when targeting for fat loss.
In order to explain it fully you need to understand muscle energy system but since I don't feel like explaining that I'll just answer your questions and give you a link

1. About 130 for you would be best according to your APMHR
2. You can't do HIIT and stick with the 130hr, it's impossible. Staying at 130 is boring as shit for almost anyone so do your HIIT, you'll only benefit more by having a healthier heart in the end.
3. No you're not burning muscle at 160, you're working muscles and building cardiovascular endurance.
4. Cardio won't effect your muscle gains as much as people seem to think but HIIT isn't regular cardio and could hinder some gains due to the intensity.

The system you're trying to target is the oxidative, it's your primary fuel system and it's what your body is using right now.

http://www.nsbri.org/HumanPhysSpace/...nergetics.html

[MuscleScience]

That's right, faster is not necessarily better when targeting for fat loss.
In order to explain it fully you need to understand muscle energy system but since I don't feel like explaining that I'll just answer your questions and give you a link

1. About 130 for you would be best according to your APMHR
2. You can't do HIIT and stick with the 130hr, it's impossible. Staying at 130 is boring as shit for almost anyone so do your HIIT, you'll only benefit more by having a healthier heart in the end.
3. No you're not burning muscle at 160, you're working muscles and building cardiovascular endurance.
4. Cardio won't effect your muscle gains as much as people seem to think but HIIT isn't regular cardio and could hinder some gains due to the intensity.

The system you're trying to target is the oxidative, it's your primary fuel system and it's what your body is using right now.

http://www.nsbri.org/HumanPhysSpace/...nergetics.html

Very nice, you a physiologist?

[HowIdo]

Adderall and an ECA stack, geez bro you must be flying around. I am prescribed adderall also, and I can tell you that depending on when you take it you will see a pretty good jump in your RHR and HR during exercise. Also, when trying to find your Target Heart Rate it would be more accurate to figure in your Resting Heart Rate. For instance if my RHR was 60 bpm the formula would look like this......

220-24 (Age) = 196
196-60 (RHR) = 136
136 x .70 (Intensity) = 95.2 + 60 (RHR) = 155.2 bpm

If I follwed the method you used my THR would be:

220-24 = 196
196 x = 137.2 bpm

Pretty big difference! The better cardiovascular shape you are in, the lower your RHR should be.

I usually do cardio after I lift, but I take 24 g Whey/10g BCAAs 10 mins prior to finishing my lifting. I then do 30 mins of cardio at 60 -70% of my max, after I am finished I usually wait around 20-30 mins and then have my regular PWO shake.

[MuscleScience]

Adderall and an ECA stack, geez bro you must be flying around. I am prescribed adderall also, and I can tell you that depending on when you take it you will see a pretty good jump in your RHR and HR during exercise. Also, when trying to find your Target Heart Rate it would be more accurate to figure in your Resting Heart Rate. For instance if my RHR was 60 bpm the formula would look like this......

220-24 (Age) = 196
196-60 (RHR) = 136
136 x .70 (Intensity) = 95.2 + 60 (RHR) = 155.2 bpm

If I follwed the method you used my THR would be:

220-24 = 196
196 x = 137.2 bpm

Pretty big difference! The better cardiovascular shape you are in, the lower your RHR should be.

I usually do cardio after I lift, but I take 24 g Whey/10g BCAAs 10 mins prior to finishing my lifting. I then do 30 mins of cardio at 60 -70% of my max, after I am finished I usually wait around 20-30 mins and then have my regular PWO shake.

I have found that the resting heart rate reserve formula is ok, THR method is ok to. Both methods are fine for the average person.

But if you really want a good predictor of working heart rate and were it should be at. Have a VO2 max with blood lactate measurements done at a local university. I have seen THR's for both methods as far off as 15 BPM. Which is a huge difference if your trying to train aerobically.

[MFT81]

220-age is the most inaccurate POS way to figure out what zone to be in, in fact me and another trainner were talking about this today.

the only way to truly know is to have yourself tested metabolicly. Try this link for the The Karvonen Formula which will allow you to plug in your own intensity level into the formula which is more accurate. Also it gives you a borg scale and talk test example, use all three and then you'll have an avg to go by......http://http://www.primusweb.com/fitnesspartner/library/activity/thr.htm

[abbot138]

220-age is the most inaccurate POS way to figure out what zone to be in, in fact me and another trainner were talking about this today.

the only way to truly know is to have yourself tested metabolicly. Try this link for the The Karvonen Formula which will allow you to plug in your own intensity level into the formula which is more accurate. Also it gives you a borg scale and talk test example, use all three and then you'll have an avg to go by......http://http://www.primusweb.com/fitnesspartner/library/activity/thr.htm

Nice link, thanks....Although this sucks, I might need to step up my cardio intensity, considerably. Which would you say is a better judge, the talking method, or The Karvonen formula bc I know for me those 2 are completely different. The formula would have me up around 150, but if i was at 150 there is no way i would be talking comfortably.

[MFT81]

Well, I think that you should base it on the K formula make a mental note of how much a convo you could have at that intensity so that you'll have a rough idea, that way, you'll never acclimate to what your doing.

you should be able (breathe) to talk like this (breathe) in short (breathe) choppy sentences(breathe)during your cardio(breathe)

and that should put you at about the right heart rate/intensity for optimal fat burning.

[abbot138]

Cool. In that case 150 does sound about right. I was talking to a trainer at our gym, he's a level1 spin instructor or whatever the fvck its called, and he knows his stuff pretty good. He confirmed that the only way to really get an accurate number is the test. But he also mentioned that kind of the poor mans method would be to close your mouth and breath through your nose, if you cant breath through your nose then your going to hard. Any thoughts on that?

[MuscleScience]

Cool. In that case 150 does sound about right. I was talking to a trainer at our gym, he's a level1 spin instructor or whatever the fvck its called, and he knows his stuff pretty good. He confirmed that the only way to really get an accurate number is the test. But he also mentioned that kind of the poor mans method would be to close your mouth and breath through your nose, if you cant breath through your nose then your going to hard. Any thoughts on that?

Its called the talk test, again its ok for the average individual. For highly trained individuals its not a great predictor of exercise intensity.

[RoadToRecovery]

So i was reading to keep my heart rate at 70% of my max for best, most efficient fat burn. 220 - age * .70 = my heart rate I should be at which would mean I'd need to keep it around 133bpm..... That seems awfully low for me. I take adderall prescribed to me by my doctor which probably helps boost my HR and I'm also on a ECA stack so my HR is up there usually... I am only taking the ephedrine twice a day now instead of 3 times a day to try to lower my rate a bit in the evening (gym time)

questions:

1. Is 133 really what it should be at? (usually its up around 155-170)

2. I'm going to start up HIIT for 20 mins post workout.... i would imagine it's going to be really hard to keep a 133bpm rate..... any suggestions?

3. so if i'm up there around 160 I'm burning muscle as well or what? ehh 133 really seems like i won't even break out a sweat!

4. also would 20 mins of HIIT PWO be ok since I know I need my PWO shake pretty quickly after lifting.... is 20 mins ok or is that even going to effect my muscle gain? I'm going to try to get A.M. cardio in but I need to adjust to it first obviously it's going to be another life style change.

Thanks everyone!

Frankly, the effect it would have on muscle gain would be very minimal. Unless you are competing and every cm counts of muscle, I dont even think you would notice a difference. Unless you are sprinting and doing long distance runs for hours on end then I think you are safe.

Every case study that comes out says something different. HIIT for 20 minutes no matter what your heart rate is, is beneficial because of its focus on calorie burning AFTER the exercise. Believe it or not, in a few articles i have read in the past, heavy weight and low reps burns way more calories then low weight high reps. Just for the simple fact of recovery time is longer, therefor more energy is expended leading to more calories burned.

Theres an article that i have somewhere about the difference between high intensity and low intensity cardio - the pros and cons of each... and it came out to be while low intensity burned more calories during the session, high intensity accumulated more calories burned after the session. Ill post it when i find it.

Every person is different however. As for me... Clen is my drug of choice and when i do a brisk walk my heart rate is at a minimum of 145bpm. Ive not only experienced NO muscle loss, but ive lost almost 5 inches off of my waist in 3 weeks, and have lost 10 lbs of fat.

[abbot138]

Thanks Mr. Science and MFT, turned out The Karvonen and the talking test were actually both pretty close. Karvonen had me around 150, and I could definately still talk in choppy sentances and breath thru nose at 150...so moral of the story, I was slacking on cardio, this shold help immensley with my progress. Thanks again guys.