Julie, here's a link that explains how to determine what your heart rate should be based on your age, fitness level, and resting heart rate: http://www.primusweb.com/fitnesspartner/library/activity/thr.htm There are also other ways of determining how hard you are working that are explained in this link; the magazines all refer to "perceived exertion" which is included. I was interested in this too--the treadmill I use says that for fat burning, my heart rate should be something like 50% to 60% of my maximum heart rate and up to 85% of my maximum for a cardio workout. It gives a general range for women in their 30s that goes up to the 160's somewhere, which I've always taken with a grain of salt since each person's resting heart rate is going to be different. So I just did the math and for "average fitness level" my target heart rate should be between 139 and 150 bpm; for "high fitness level" it should be between 155 and 166 bpm. My problem is that I regularly hit the low to mid 170s without really feeling like I'm overdoing it--does this mean I'm going to drop dead during one of my workouts or that my maximum is somewhat higher than most 37 year olds? 175 bpm would be 85% of the maximum heart rate for a "high fitness level" 25 year old, for example! So--youthful for my age or about to kick the bucket?
I'm not normally very mathematically minded (and I'm not even sure I spelled that right) but when it comes to fitness and weight loss, I like to quantify it with numbers--thus daily weigh ins, measuring my body, tracking my maximum heart rate, and counting calories. I know that to lose a pound in a week you have to use up 3500 more calories than you take in. So I figure if you *aren't* losing this amount then your calculations are wrong--either you're taking in more than you think or are burning off less than you think. There's no really good way of tracking what you burn (I assume that the "calories burned" counters on gym machines and the estimates given on mypyramid and other sites are only a starting point because they don't know what YOUR particular metabolism is, plus your metabolism is going to change based on your increasing level of fitness and decreasing caloric intake) but tracking what you take in is easy, and then you can work out what you've burned off from there based on whether or not you lost weight over time. This is only vaguely scientific on my part (I should go see if there's a way to *really* find out what your metabolic rate is) but it works for me and so far I'm liking the results. According to mypyramid, I should easily lose a pound or more a week just by cutting to 1500 calories or fewer per day, but it doesn't work that way for me--if I don't exercise, I lose at a much slower rate. Others are more fortunate and CAN just reduce what they are eating by a few hundred calories and they'll lose weight.
This is my long winded way of saying that I don't think it really matters how you keep track of your intake/outgo (is that a word?) rate--the only thing that matters is if what you're doing is working! And if what you're doing isn't working, do something else. I keep saying that losing weight isn't easy, but it's not rocket science either. Unless, like me, you do your best to make it as complicated as possible!
Where's Emily? She has to stop disappearing like this! I'm used to Mom and Katie making only rare appearances, but not Emily. It worries me.
No comments:
Post a Comment