rss
 
comment(s)

archives
J|F|M|A|M|J|J|A|S|O|N|D
(20##) 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 <
 
DesktopWeb FormText   brawn : more heart rate nonsenseSat, 02 Aug 2008 05:29:03 GMT # 

was reminded last weekend of another why i dont wear a watch while working out. had the heart rate monitor (HRM) on and was doing dumbbell bench. about half way through my last set, i started to lose feeling in my left hand. ends up my forearm had gotten a little pump and the watch band was cutting off some of the circulation. just got the universal heart rate data logger and i'm hoping that will replace the need for a watch.

still trying to get a better idea of how many calories i burn while exercising. now i know to trust the HRM and not the caloric estimates of the cardio machines. but now i'm trying to make sure i have the right settings in the HRM. you have to enter standard things like weight, age, height. but you can also enter resting heart rate, max heart rate, and VO2. for resting heart rate, i think the watch defaulted to 60 (average for an adult is between 60 and 100). but mine is super low. it's always below 50, usually around 45. it even has its own medical term : Bradycardia ... that's a little scary! for max heart rate, the watch was at 188. a trainer recommended for me to workout with the chest strap, and then check the results for max heart rate. so far, my max heart rate was 151 after doing squats. the tough one is VO2. the watch has a test that put me at 37 (fair). when i did the O2 test at the gym, they only maxed me out to 33 (low), but it estimated my VO2 at 57 (elite). so i'm not entirely sure which number to trust? but the trainer i've been going to with HRM related questions said to go with the 57 estimate. that gives me all the settings i need ... now the question is if these new settings will have any significant effect on estimating how many calories i burn? just to add more variables ... my lifting sessions will change from 7-9 reps to 10-12. i'm guessing that change alone will have me burning more calories.

another problem i have is with fitness articles. nutrition and training related articles should tell you the authors body type (endo, ecto, meso ... or mixed). i'm mixed endo-meso. but i'll be reading a nutrition article only to find out its written by a 'hardgainer' (aka ecto), so i have to disregard most of that article. right now i'm trying to find good articles about gaining lean muscle mass. most of these articles are written by hardgainers and are basically saying to eat, eat, eat ... which doesnt work with the endo in me, because i would just add on the fat i just lost. instead, i found an article that says to eat, eat, starve ... which is probably a better plan for me. instead of getting an additional 500 calories every day, i'm only going to do that on workout days; and on off-days, i'll keep calories at or slightly below maintenance level. it's the mirrored version of a 'cheat day' when losing weight ... the 'dont get fat day' when adding lean muscle.