I don't know anything about this author, nor have I read the book, but this agrees with the advice my trainer has been giving me for many years.
http://velonews.competitor.com/2010/...ng-zone_134214
Printable View
I don't know anything about this author, nor have I read the book, but this agrees with the advice my trainer has been giving me for many years.
http://velonews.competitor.com/2010/...ng-zone_134214
My fat burning zone is a big hill. If I rode it a dozen times a day, I'd burn a lot of fat. /nod
The real fat burning zone is intervals.
Intervals will burn fat by raising metabolism. Good thing. HOWEVER, endurance rides (heart rate at ~70% to 75%) teach your body to burn fat preferentially to sugar. Burning fat takes more work because your body must go through the Krebs cycle. Unfit people tend to be sugar-burners & then they bonk/quit. I've read that people who are endurance athletes burn more fat and the fat burning rate seems to increase proportionally to the amount of endurance fitness they've attained.
I don't think they call it the Krebs cycle anymore.
I think it's just called the electron transport chain.
Krebs Cycle would be a cool name for an lbs or for a bike.
I like to call it the Maynard G. Krebs cycle :D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7z_JG...eature=related
Last time I re-certified, they called it Krebs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zen
+1 on endurance. The thing about low intensity is that you can sustain it. High intensity may still burn more fat per hour, but I can't sustain it long enough to do a thing from a fat burning POV. An interval session might last me an hour and a quarter, tops, with warm-up and recovery jog, and I'm DONE at the end of it.
I feel that it's doing any exercise that burns the most calories, as opposed the not doing any exercise, like a LOT of people. If you like intervals, do intervals. If you like long, slow distances, then do that. Just DO something. IF you only have a short time to exercise, then intervals is the best in calories/minute. But the exercise that you like, and will continue to do on a regular basis, is better than the one that burns more calories but you hate and will quit.
+1 especially for the bolded part.Quote:
Originally Posted by roadie gal
Honest, I don't think I've tried intervals...and I've been cycling regularily for past um..17 yrs.
There have been times in life I could have benefitted from intervals, but impractical with pannier weight when one weaves in cycle commuting as part of one's lifestyle within a long complicated work commute. So I just cycle-plodded along from and to home in the dark with pannier weight. It was the only time I could muster. At least it was cycling of some form.
Right!Quote:
Originally Posted by Zen
The Krebs cycle is the older name. The preferred name these days is the citric acid cycle or tricarboxylic acid cycle, as it's become fashionable to give processes and diseases descriptive names rather than naming it after its discoverer. The electron transport chain is what the Krebs/TCA cycle products feed into--and where you get most of the energy.
:)
Malkin: I'm now going to buy a bike, paint all the intermediates on it, and call it the Krebs Cycle. :D