Heartrate and training - will I die?

[thehawk]

So, I'm 37, carrying a couple of extra stone and have lead a reasonably sedentary lifestyle over the last few years interspersed with the odd 2-3 months fitness program, or bike-riding to work.

So a couple of months ago I started training with a heart rate monitor and although it's very scientific and my fitness is improving noticeably it's also probably made me very paranoid about what my heart is actually doing, almost to the point where I'm scared to get it above 140-150 - which is obviously easy to do if you are doing intervals or sprints.

Should I just throw it away and go old-school - just go to a spinning class for example and pedal for an hour adjusting the effort based on my own feeling and exhaustion knowing that my HR will go way up to max at times, or is it best to train according to actual HR.

I know most people will just go out and exercise for an hour and not monitor their heart, but does that actual do any damage or create a risk?

[john_p]

What actually concerns you so much? Your heart is designed to work at all ranges.

[M400 NBL]

May be worth going to see the doctor. If your blood pressure is high (mine was when my old company were paying for all my 3 course meals + beers prior to being made redundant) then your doc may suggest taking it easy until it lowers.

Just a thought....

If there is no problem with your blood pressure, I think a HR of around 170 for your age (i'm 36) is classed as cariovascular, which I assume is a fair bit below danger levels.

I've had my HR in the 200's on bike rides in the past...and i'm still here.

Edited by M400 NBL on Friday 3rd July 11:36

[thehawk]

john_p said:

What actually concerns you so much? Your heart is designed to work at all ranges.

Guess I'm just being paranoid. You hear of 40 year old joggers or squash players dropping dead.

[SoapyShowerBoy]

http://www.ehow.com/how_4563159_calculate-ideal-ex...


this should put your mind at rest

[gareth h]

I should do some research on HR, generally the low intensity stuff is to develop stamina/fat burning, unless you have good reason I wouldn't worry about doing the intense stuff, as a guide your max hr is 220 - your age.

[Marcellus]

WHen you start to use an HR monitor to train by there's a lot you need to learn.

The 1st and probably most important is what your max is...... the calculations are really only a very poor average guide... example my "calculated" max is 179 whereas my true max is 198!!

You can then work everything out from there!!

In general terms the lower you keep your heart rate the more fat you will burn and stronger your muscles will develop... as you get higher and higher you move through aerobic and into anaerobic..

(my blood pressure is spot on for a man of my age too, so not sure of the correlation between BP and HR max)

[Tiggsy]

you burn fat by using calories during exercise and fat then being use to replenish them later....1hr at 140bpm will see you loose more fat than 1hr at 120bpm.

ever see many fat sprinters?

[Marcellus]

Tiggsy said:

you burn fat by using calories during exercise and fat then being use to replenish them later....1hr at 140bpm will see you loose more fat than 1hr at 120bpm.

ever see many fat sprinters?

My understanding is that that statement is not true.... when you excercise at a lower rate you use the bodies fat reserves whereas when at a higher rate you use muscle...

If you have an exercise bike and HR monitor which shows % fat try it; ride for half an hour with your HR at 55/60%..... record the calories and % fat... reset the HR and ride for half an hour with your HR at 75/80%...... and record the data...... the calories will be pretty much constant but the % fat figure will be significantly higher on the "easy" ride

[thehawk]

I think the fat burning zone is a bit of a con, most things I've read seem to think it's better to exercise at a higher rate, the ratios may change but the reality is you'll still be burning more calories and fat.

[gareth h]

I'm sure you're right but you can't keep the high intensity exercise up for long enough, where as you can, say cycle for 3-4 hours at a low intensity.

[thehawk]

gareth h said:

I'm sure you're right but you can't keep the high intensity exercise up for long enough, where as you can, say cycle for 3-4 hours at a low intensity.

Yeah, but say for an hour of cardio, my fat burning zone is something like 115-128, I can exercise at a greater intensity for an hour than that so it would be a waste not to do it especially seeing as higher intensity exercise is meant to be better for you.

Sometimes I think the fat burning zone was invented so people could sit on exercise bikes reading magazines and watching TV and somehow convince themselves they were doing good.

My primary reason for exercise is for fitness, not weight loss as I think diet is far more important when it comes to losing weight anyway.

[Marcellus]

is that range using a calculated or true Max?

[thehawk]

Roughly 60-70% of age related max - so obviously rough. I prefer to train at 85%, at 60-70% I just feel mildly warm and don't feel like I've actually done much.

[Digger]

I don't think you have mentioned whether your HRM can display % of HR but that might make you less "paranoid"? I generally do early cardio in the mid to high 70's and the majority in the 80's occasionally getting in the 90's towards the end of a rowing or x-trainer cardio session. As a result I am now as lean as a lean thing.