Heart Rate

On 20/8/04 2:00 pm, in article [email hidden], "gopher

bronze said:

Since no
effort had been used, how am I supposed to lose weight and keep the ticker
under check I thought. Went to see doctor. she told me not to worry about
it and keep pedalling! ho-hum.

Absolutely right. Get the basics in shape first and then worry about
optimising performance.

IOW just get out and ride. The longer you go, the more energy you'll burn,
irrespective of heart rate.

The harder you go the more energy you burn in a given time but the shorter
time you can ride for.

In the first instance: ride at about the fastest pace you can sustain for
the time you are riding.

Eat less calories than you are burning.

Drink lots. ANd then some more (water, not beer).

...d
(a few years younger but not as fat as he used to be).

gopher bronze said:

I'm a 44yo male Fat [censored]. I used to enjoy cycling, as long as it didn't
involve gradients I was fine! Than I joined a Health Club. They decided
that I should keep my HR below 150odd. It was 120 before I truned a wheel!
5mins gentle spinning later, it was 165 and heading for the hills. Since no
effort had been used, how am I supposed to lose weight and keep the ticker
under check I thought. Went to see doctor. she told me not to worry about
it and keep pedalling! ho-hum.

For reference. In a two hour stint on the flat, I cover approx 25km and
lose 4.5kg in water!!! I always take a towel or two. And a change of
clothing. Douglas Adams was right.

IME health clubs use a very rough estimate, based on what is sometimes a
wildly innacurate maxHR determined by the 220-age formula.

My mother had similar experiences to yours, and gave up the health club,
convinced she was about to keel over. While in her case some degree of
caution was probably a good thing, in practice this has resulted in her
continuing to be unhealthily unfit :-(

I've recently passed my old HRM over to her, along with some other info
relating to heart rate stuff, in the hope it might persuade her that the
health club were being overly conservative, and while she's unfit, the
only way out of that is to try and do something about it, albeit gently
to start with.

--

Velvet

"gopher bronze" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I'm a 44yo male Fat [censored]. I used to enjoy cycling, as long as it

didn't

Quoted message said:

involve gradients I was fine! Than I joined a Health Club.

See -- that was your first mistake.

Quoted message said:

They decided
that I should keep my HR below 150odd. It was 120 before I truned a

wheel!

Quoted message said:

5mins gentle spinning later, it was 165 and heading for the hills. Since

no

Quoted message said:

effort had been used, how am I supposed to lose weight and keep the ticker
under check I thought. Went to see doctor. she told me not to worry

about

Quoted message said:

it and keep pedalling! ho-hum.

Unusual -- a doctor with sense!

Quoted message said:

For reference. In a two hour stint on the flat, I cover approx 25km and
lose 4.5kg in water!!! I always take a towel or two. And a change of
clothing. Douglas Adams was right.

Sounds like you need to drink more water.

For fat burning it is best to keep your heart rate at a reasonably low % of
your 'maximum' rate (which, if I understand it right is the point that you
fall off your perch so its best not to go there!!) -- which you were
probably doing before anyone bothered you with figures.

A 2 hour gentle cycle ride is near on the perfect exercise for Fat [censored]
(of which I am one). If your doing it for two hours it cannot be
overstressing anything, its reasonably non impact and its a damn sight
cheaper than the health club without all the mumbo jumbo.

Get back on the bike & enjoy.

T

"Tony W" <[email hidden]>typed>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

she told me not to worry about
it and keep pedalling! ho-hum.

Quoted message said:

Unusual -- a doctor with sense!

<cough> Ahem!
I think I might have advised similarly not long ago ;-)

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

For reference. In a two hour stint on the flat, I cover approx 25km and
lose 4.5kg in water!!! I always take a towel or two. And a change of
clothing. Douglas Adams was right.

Quoted message said:

Sounds like you need to drink more water.

Sounds like a measurement error to me!

4.5kg is a gallon of sweat (I *love* mixing my units!)

On a 25km ride of an hour or two, sweating quite that much is unlikely
unless you're very fat and end up with very wet clothes.

A pint is more than enough to soak your clothes.

Make sure you drink enough. If you're sweating as much as you say, you
should make sure you replace your fluid losses with drinks containing
electrolytes.

Quoted message said:

A 2 hour gentle cycle ride is near on the perfect exercise for Fat [censored]
(of which I am one).

And I am another...

Quoted message said:

If your doing it for two hours it cannot be
overstressing anything, its reasonably non impact and its a damn sight
cheaper than the health club without all the mumbo jumbo.

Quoted message said:

Get back on the bike & enjoy.

Absolutely!

--
Helen D. Vecht: [email hidden]
Edgware.

Helen Deborah Vecht said:

"Tony W" <[email hidden]>typed>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

she told me not to worry about
it and keep pedalling! ho-hum.

Quoted message said:

Unusual -- a doctor with sense!

<cough> Ahem!
I think I might have advised similarly not long ago ;-)

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

For reference. In a two hour stint on the flat, I cover approx 25km and
lose 4.5kg in water!!! I always take a towel or two. And a change of
clothing. Douglas Adams was right.

Quoted message said:

Sounds like you need to drink more water.

Sounds like a measurement error to me!

4.5kg is a gallon of sweat (I *love* mixing my units!)

On a 25km ride of an hour or two, sweating quite that much is unlikely
unless you're very fat and end up with very wet clothes.

A pint is more than enough to soak your clothes.

Presumably some weight is lost as exhaled water vapour as well, or is
that negligible?

A

"Ambrose Nankivell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Presumably some weight is lost as exhaled water vapour as well, or is
that negligible?

It shouldn't be negligible, one loses about a pint each night just lying there
sleeping, as any modern tent camper can attest.
--
"As for the hexamine stove. OW! Burnt fingers again!..... and the
bloody thing's gone out.....OW! no it hasn't." - Judith in uk.rec.walking

"gopher bronze" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I'm a 44yo male Fat [censored]. I used to enjoy cycling, as long as it didn't
involve gradients I was fine! Than I joined a Health Club. They decided
that I should keep my HR below 150odd. It was 120 before I truned a wheel!
5mins gentle spinning later, it was 165 and heading for the hills. Since no
effort had been used, how am I supposed to lose weight and keep the ticker
under check I thought. Went to see doctor. she told me not to worry about
it and keep pedalling! ho-hum.

The HC has to err on the safe side, and they probably used the estimate for your
max HR of 220-age which is 176 in your case. You only need to do about 70% of
that to be burning fat, which presumably is your initial goal.

Some people can go well over 220-age with no risk. I can regularly do 195 and
I've sustained 200+ for several minutes and I'm no longer 20. Or 30 for that
matter 🙂

Quoted message said:

For reference. In a two hour stint on the flat, I cover approx 25km and
lose 4.5kg in water!!! I always take a towel or two. And a change of
clothing. Douglas Adams was right.

Doesn't sound right. I've lost a kg in an hour and that was during intense
karate training sessions in 40 celsius temperatures. I was young and fit at the
time and it made me feel jolly ill.
--
Mark South, Super Genius: World Citizen, Net Denizen

[email hidden] schreef ...

Quoted message said:

The HC has to err on the safe side, and they probably used the estimate for your
max HR of 220-age which is 176 in your case. You only need to do about 70% of
that to be burning fat, which presumably is your initial goal.

Ahem ..... one does *always* burn fat when exercising. At lower heart
rates (say something like 60-70% of max.) the body burns a *relatively*
high amount of fat to fuel itself. At higher rates (like 80% and
higher), the relative amount of fat burnt goes down. But: the *absolute*
amount of fat burned per minute at high intensities is higher than at
low intensity.

So: if you've become fit enough to maintain the high intensity, fat
burning will be quicker than at low intensity.

--
Regards,
Marten

On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 13:00:44 +0000 (UTC), "gopher bronze"
<[email hidden]> wrote (more or less):

Quoted message said:

I'm a 44yo male Fat [censored]. I used to enjoy cycling, as long as it didn't
involve gradients I was fine! Than I joined a Health Club. They decided
that I should keep my HR below 150odd. It was 120 before I truned a wheel!
5mins gentle spinning later, it was 165 and heading for the hills. Since no
effort had been used, how am I supposed to lose weight and keep the ticker
under check I thought.

The trick is to freewheel until you've slowed down a few km/h, select
the next lower gear, and then start pedalling again with the same
cadence as before.

For what it's worth, I'm in exactly the same spot - I keep wondering
how I can possibly pedal less hard. This is hard to do, but comes
with practice. It's /really/ easy to let the effort creep up, and
the heart rate scoots up right along.

If you're at 120 from the exertion of meandering about getting ready
to set off, and 165 spinning at the gentle rate, there is definitely a
level between these two.

So. Spin /even more/ gently. Probably with the same cadence. But in
a lower gear.

Quoted message said:

Went to see doctor. she told me not to worry about it and keep pedalling! ho-hum.

For reference. In a two hour stint on the flat, I cover approx 25km and
lose 4.5kg in water!!! I always take a towel or two. And a change of
clothing. Douglas Adams was right.

Assuming you weigh about 15 stone, you'll be using about... 37
calories per km, so over the 25km you'll burn calories equivalent to
about 1/4 of a pound of fat.

(A pound of fat = 3,500 calories. 100km is approx. equal to how far a
15stone man has to cycle to burn calories equivalent to a pound of
body fat).

If you pace yourself slower, you'll burn fewer calories, but you'll be
burning less a lot less muscle glycogen. So you'll be able to keep
going for longer (without eating), and a higher proportion of the
calories burnt will be taken directly out of your fat reserves.

Last week I did 51km over the week. A piffling amount relative to
most posters on this list, but more than I've done in a one single
week in years - including a couple of months ago when I had a weekend
family cycling holiday!

But the thing I'm most pleased with is that I burnt over 1/2lb's worth
of calories.

--
Cheers,
Euan
Gawnsoft: http://www.gawnsoft.co.sr
Symbian/Epoc wiki: http://html.dnsalias.net:1122
Smalltalk links (harvested from comp.lang.smalltalk) http://html.dnsalias.net/gawnsoft/smalltalk

On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 22:22:45 +0200, Marten Hoffmann
<[email hidden]> wrote (more or less):

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] schreef ...

Quoted message said:

The HC has to err on the safe side, and they probably used the estimate for your
max HR of 220-age which is 176 in your case. You only need to do about 70% of
that to be burning fat, which presumably is your initial goal.

Ahem ..... one does *always* burn fat when exercising. At lower heart
rates (say something like 60-70% of max.) the body burns a *relatively*
high amount of fat to fuel itself. At higher rates (like 80% and
higher), the relative amount of fat burnt goes down. But: the *absolute*
amount of fat burned per minute at high intensities is higher than at
low intensity.

So: if you've become fit enough to maintain the high intensity, fat
burning will be quicker than at low intensity.

Burning it quicker isn't so much the point tho'. It's better to burn
more of it.

Pretty much, you burn the same calories per mile whether you're going
at it at low intensity or high intensity.

But you can keep going for many more miles at the lower intensity, and
so burn more fat overall.

So, best to work out how much time you have, and go as fast as you can
manage to for the entire time available.

And try to make more time available.

Carrying heavy things in your bike will also help fat-burning, too.

For extra exercise, I now carry big bottles of water in my panniers,
and all my bike tools.

I also try to get my toddler to come out with me on his bike seat. He
weighs a good few kilos!

--
Cheers,
Euan
Gawnsoft: http://www.gawnsoft.co.sr
Symbian/Epoc wiki: http://html.dnsalias.net:1122
Smalltalk links (harvested from comp.lang.smalltalk) http://html.dnsalias.net/gawnsoft/smalltalk

Marten Hoffmann pibbled:

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] schreef ...

So: if you've become fit enough to maintain the high intensity, fat
burning will be quicker than at low intensity.

Point is, you've got to get fit enough in the first place. Will keep you
posted.

gopher bronze said:

Marten Hoffmann pibbled:

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] schreef ...

So: if you've become fit enough to maintain the high intensity, fat
burning will be quicker than at low intensity.

Point is, you've got to get fit enough in the first place. Will keep you
posted.

Very true - and I've been in that situation :-) Just take it easy to
start with, if you're looking at training with a hrm then can I suggest
you take a look at Heart Rate Monitor Book for Cyclists (or something
similar) by Sally Edwards (and I think Sally Rogers?) - a search on
amazon should find it - ISBN: 1931382042.

I think you'd find it useful to read and work alongside, if you're using
a HRM (do you have your own, or are you using the gym's?) - and even if
you're not but plan to, worth having a read of this before you go buy,
it might help you decide which features you really would find useful etc.

I got my basic fitness off the floor (I was very unfit) by swimming,
rather than cycling - several years ago. Initially I could just about
swim a couple of lengths in the pool (50metres). Then I stuck it out
for doing four lengths with short breathers between. Then 8, 10, 12.
That took 1-2 weeks to achieve. Then I did 12 lengths and stopped for
shorter times/didn't stop - again, working up to it. Once I'd cracked
12, I set myself a target for 20 for the next visit. 20 came and went,
and I was still swimming, so decided to double it to 24. Next visit, I
thought hey, maybe I can make 30... but 33 (I think it's 33?) would be
about half a mile. I did 36, just so I could be sure I'd done half a
mile... next visit, I did a mile. A few after that, and it was 2 miles
(my as yet unbroken personal best - it starts to get a bit time
consuming after that!!)

The first 12 miles were the hardest by far, and it's been the same with
cycling, though I did get chucked in the deep end on that with a 28 mile
ride first time out ;-)

I guess my point is that even if you take it slowly to start with, and
feel like you're not doing enough, that you shoudl be able to do more,
it'll come in time, and racing through the early stuff with the no pain
no gain thing isn't necessary.

I've been working with a HRM for part of this year for my cycling - I
decided to do the london to cambridge bike ride - a day of roughly 60
miles cycling for me, with getting to the start and back etc - the
furthest I'd done before this year was 36 miles, and that was a struggle
for the last 8 of them... I'm overweight, still unfit, and hills
regularly defeat me ;-)

I managed to put in some fairly (for me) gruelling close to 50 mile
rides (well, 2, I think) when I realised I actually probably was capable
of the L2C. That was 6 weeks before it was due to take place. I got 5
weeks of training in with the help of that book and the HRM, and every
other weekend I'd do a 40-50 mile ride on the sunday around
cambridgeshire (so not up the side of mountains!). The L2C was going to
be the hilliest 50 mile ride I'd ever done, so there was not a little
apprehension about that!

5 weeks determination and religious insistance on climbing on the bike 6
days a week, and it paid off. And I wasn't sure I was doing enough
initially - I was doing half an hour, an hour, occasionally an hour and
20 mins etc on the week days - how was that going to be enough to get me
through 5-6 hours cycling up bigger hills... but it was.

It's slipped a bit in the last 3 weeks, I've not been on the bike much,
due to work interfering, my lack of willpower/lazyness, and
self-inflicted lack of sleep leading to no energy feelings. But this
week I've been back on it, re-establishing the habit, and feel so much
better for it again.

Oh, and meant to say - 2 hour stint - is that on the bike in the gym?
I'm thinking it might be - the difference I found with bike on trainer
(my way of doing it) vs bike out on road was the road would push me much
harder than on the trainer (which was hard enough!) - so I'd not overdo
it whilst training indoors, whereas outside I'd be guaranteed to be
working at a MUCH higher level than book mentioned above suggested. I
found this (suprisingly) HAD had an effect on my fitness - doing a 50
mile at about the limit of what I was capable of was making me fitter,
but not nearly as fast as doing 5-6 hours cycling spread over the week
working at much lower intensities, hardly ever up where I spend quite a
lot of time at on a ride out on the roads.

Book also makes working on the bike indoors more interesting. Intervals
are great things, if teeth-gritting at the time ;-) And a good HRM will
allow you to simulate the changing conditions of a ride outside but
still retain control over how *hard* it all is.

Course, a lot will just say get out there and ride the roads/tracks etc
and don't worry about it ;-) I have to say given the difference in
improvement between the hour a day low-mod intensity and the 50 mile in
a day mod-high intensity way of doing it, the hour a day won hands down.

I'm still overweight and alarmingly bulgy in lycra, but I'm a good deal
fitter than I used to be, and that's the most important thing at the end
of the day (though yes, I want to be lithe and tromp up hills ahead of
everyone else on my bike some day!)

And with that, enough blathering for today. I'm off out with my camera
in search of photogenic things on my not-planned-but-never-mind vague
rambling walk through several miles of countryside
somewhere-not-yet-decided 😉

--

Velvet

Quoted message said:

4.5kg is a gallon of sweat (I *love* mixing my units!)

That's SO gross *bleah!*

--
Toby

Velvet pibbled:

Quoted message said:

gopher bronze said:

Marten Hoffmann pibbled:

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] schreef ...

So: if you've become fit enough to maintain the high intensity, fat
burning will be quicker than at low intensity.

Point is, you've got to get fit enough in the first place. Will keep you
posted.

Very true - and I've been in that situation :-) Just take it easy to
start with...

Bet you're a bugger on the phone! 😄

I really wanted to swim my way thin, but my tendency to sink precludes this.
I can't think of anything quite as mind-numbingly boring as a exercise bike.
Given the space, I'd have a rowing machine. Just as pointless, but that
'pull' is strangely satisfying! I don't even want to consider myself in
Lycra. And neither do you!
On Monday. I'm going to 'push the envelope' (jiffy bag?) and will give
times, distances and weights. All here will feel smug. It's a service
y'know!

gopher bronze said:

Velvet pibbled:

Quoted message said:

gopher bronze said:

Marten Hoffmann pibbled:

>[email hidden] schreef ...
>
>
>So: if you've become fit enough to maintain the high intensity, fat
>burning will be quicker than at low intensity.

Point is, you've got to get fit enough in the first place. Will keep you
posted.

Very true - and I've been in that situation :-) Just take it easy to
start with...

Bet you're a bugger on the phone! 😄

I really wanted to swim my way thin, but my tendency to sink precludes this.
I can't think of anything quite as mind-numbingly boring as a exercise bike.
Given the space, I'd have a rowing machine. Just as pointless, but that
'pull' is strangely satisfying! I don't even want to consider myself in
Lycra. And neither do you!
On Monday. I'm going to 'push the envelope' (jiffy bag?) and will give
times, distances and weights. All here will feel smug. It's a service
y'know!

:-)

Strangely enough, I don't talk much on the phone. No, really, I don't.
It's only online that I can pibble (great word!) to this extent...

I used to view lycra the same way, however, it's wonderful stuff (when
combined with other materials) for keeping you cool, dry, and comfy ;-)
Despite the bulges, I take the view that I don't see myself in it, so
I can pretend it's not as horrific as it really is and wear it with
confidence!

Weights - is this you weighing yourself pre/post ride? If so, how much
water are you drinking while you're out on the bike - it's really easy
to get dehydrated and the heart rate goes up if you are, so that might
be another factor.

--

Velvet

On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 23:56:29 +0000 (UTC), "gopher bronze"
<[email hidden]> wrote (more or less):

....

Quoted message said:

I can't think of anything quite as mind-numbingly boring as a exercise bike.

To be honest, an exercise bike while reading a good book, or watching
the telly progs that you wanted to watch anyway, strikes me as the
opposite of mind-numbingly boring.

How interesting it is depends on the book or the programme, tho'!

Quoted message said:

Given the space, I'd have a rowing machine. Just as pointless, but that
'pull' is strangely satisfying! I don't even want to consider myself in
Lycra. And neither do you!
On Monday. I'm going to 'push the envelope' (jiffy bag?) and will give
times, distances and weights. All here will feel smug.

I won't! As I said, I'm in the same spot. I only started cycling for
fitness last Friday!

Quoted message said:

It's a service y'know!

It is - I've been too embarrassed to provide it!

--
Cheers,
Euan
Gawnsoft: http://www.gawnsoft.co.sr
Symbian/Epoc wiki: http://html.dnsalias.net:1122
Smalltalk links (harvested from comp.lang.smalltalk) http://html.dnsalias.net/gawnsoft/smalltalk

On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 23:56:29 +0000 (UTC), "gopher bronze"
<[email hidden]> wrote (more or less):
....

Quoted message said:

I don't even want to consider myself in Lycra.

I've only just started wearing a 'Coolmax' shirt. I got in in Aldi
for £6, as at that price it seemed worth a punt.

It's fabulous stuff. It's completely transformed how sweaty I am
after (what is for me) a long ride. And because it's better at
spreading the sweat about, I end up feeling warmer than in thick
cotton t-shirts, which is what I tended to have next to my skin
before.

I heartily recomend them.

....

--
Cheers,
Euan
Gawnsoft: http://www.gawnsoft.co.sr
Symbian/Epoc wiki: http://html.dnsalias.net:1122
Smalltalk links (harvested from comp.lang.smalltalk) http://html.dnsalias.net/gawnsoft/smalltalk

gopher bronze said:

I'm a 44yo male Fat [censored]. I used to enjoy cycling, as long as it didn't
involve gradients I was fine! Than I joined a Health Club. They decided
that I should keep my HR below 150odd. It was 120 before I truned a wheel!
5mins gentle spinning later, it was 165 and heading for the hills.

I stopped using mine as I was concerned that watching it would give me a
heart attack.

Recommended work out rate for my age was calculated at 152 per min.
Most of the time I was exercising at about 165 and it shot up to 182 on
one paricular hill near me.

--
replace cigarman@deadspam with dunsmokin at btinternet dot com to reply
Tom Anderson
Leighton Buzzard
England