Calories eaten: 1914
Breakdown(c/p/f): 50/18/31
Water: 2L
Workout: 2-mile run (+1 mile of warmup/cooldown)
Workout time: 0:45:34
Distance: 3 miles
Average speed: 4.15 mph run, 3.95 mph workout
In target HR zone (125-164): 0:21:03
Average HR: 151 bpm
Calories burned: 439 (154*)
*Along with the workout calorie count, my HRM provides a percentage of the calories burned that were from fat. I read their explanation of how they determine this, and it's the whole "fat-burning is more efficient at low-to-moderate intensity" thing. That's my gross oversimplification, of course...I'm sure if you google fat-burning or something, it'll have an explanation better than that. Probably with charts. And there'll probably be 15-20 sites telling you what complete bullshit it all is. But whatever.
At any rate, I haven't been including this number because I didn't really care much about it. I mean, if I burn 200 calories in 30 minutes at a low intensity and 50% of them are from fat, or if I burn 300 calories in 30 minutes at a higher intensity and 35% of them are from fat, I'm still coming out ahead by going with the higher intensity, at least from a purely fat-calories-burned standpoint.
But now, I'm considering taking all but my running workouts down into an aerobic HR range...which, according to an article that was sent to me last week but I don't have the URL at the office to link, means under 150 bpm for me.
So, what I want to see is how much my fat-calories numbers will decrease if I do take the intensity down on the Precor and the spinning class (the only two where my HR gets above 150 at my current levels of effort). In order to do this, I need to start paying attention to that percentage.
What that number in parentheses is, then, is the number of calories burned from fat--total calories * % from fat = fat calories.
Posted by Joy at April 19, 2005 08:57 AM