Another fact about situps... They work the hip flexors MUCH MORE than they work the abdominal muscles.

Let's also add eating after a certain hour will make you gain weight as a myth too.

As a fitness professional I appreciate hearing the truth and clearing up the confusion...great job

so if the "fat burning zone" is a myth, then all those machines at the gym that have the zones marked "fat burn", "cardio", etc (based on your heart rate/age) are all tracking useless information? Good to know. I had a free 1 hour training session at 24HR Fitness, and the trainer suggested I follow the 'zones' to optimize my workout. Guess that was a wasted hour!

"No pain no gain" - partly true.  A dull ache is okay.  A sharp stabbing pain means stop immediately.

"Burn fat while you sleep" - also partly true.  You burn fat every minute of your life, but a pill is not going to help.

(Next:  myths about dieting?)

I do love these articles that only print half of the story and leave everybody confused as to what to do.  Especially when the so-called experts talk about the "so-called" fat burning zone.  There is a fat burning zone, but it is not what you think it is.  The author just denies the existence of it instead of explaining how the body really works.  Thanks for adding to the giant pile of misinformation.  It is no wonder that very few people can seem to manage their weight.

Just do cardio to slim up first, and weight training to tone up. Why does everyone think it's so complicated?

Joe,

Maybe the writer of the column didn't tell us what that "zone" was, but neither did you!  We are waiting to hear...

...so?

Actually Doing weights combined with cardio is the best way to slim up. Cardio is great and helps alot, but working muscle groups helps just as much. People who think they should just run and save the weights for later are not maximizing their potential

The notion of "zones" is not as important as the metabolic state of your body; that is to say, whether your exercise has created an anabolic or catabolic environment.  When you do weight training with challenging weights and explosive movements, you create an anabolic environment, where human growth and other hormones are released, creating an environment where muscle is built and fat is burned.  The inverse is to create a catabolic environment, most often through steady-state exercise at low to moderate intensity for long durations.  Such exercise triggers corisol release and encourages the body to burn muscle (a metabolically expensive structure) and store fat.  Pay attention to the metabolic state you're encouraging and you'll avoid wasted time in the gym.

I was obese and worked out for years at 85% of MHR and lost no weight.  After working out, I'd be exhausted and starving.  Working out in the lower "fat burning" zone for twice as long as worked much better for me.  I am better able to stay on my eating plan and I don't have to nap.  If you can spend the additional time, the slower workout might work better for you.  It has made a big difference for me.

"Guess that was a wasted hour!"

No, it wasn't wasted. A lot of exercise myths come from the fact that many "fitness trainers" aren't scientists, but rather jocks. There is a bunch of ancedotal myth in fitness, and it's hard to distinguish it from science.

Guess what, if you work out in the fat burning zone and burn fat instead of carbs, afterwards the body will make fat from the carbs you would have burned if you worked out in the carb burning zone.

lifting weights make muscle, muscles burn fat, bigger muscles burn more fat,

"I was obese and worked out for years at 85% of MHR and lost no weight.  After working out, I'd be exhausted and starving.  Working out in the lower "fat burning" zone for twice as long as worked much better for me."

That's the secret right there. Find the zone that allows you to burn the most calories

You body can also go into "starvation mode"; i.e. your metabolism will plateau and you won;t be able to drop weight.

This usually happens when you eat far to few calories, burn way to many, or even when training becomes very monotonous and standard.

Increasing Calories or decreasing the amount burned can actually help jump start it again.  You body can go into survival mode and it'll burn up everything else that's not fat.

A good calorie differential to shoot for is 500-750 calories a day, about a pound a week of fat tissue.

Also, you shouldn't shoot for losing weight, you should be shooting to get your body fat down.  It's a much more realistic goal, albeit harder to measure (not that much, go read a book).

I don't believe there's a one-size-fits-all exercise program.  We're all "snowflakes," and what works for one person would never work for another.  I'm sure we all know someone who eats only junk food but is thin as a rail, or the other person who does everything right but is always 50 lbs overweight.  You have to find what works for you.

This is all so weird!  Here's the "secret" folks: Take in fewer calories than you burn and you will lose weight, no two ways about it, up to and including the point at which you die.  It's called the law of physics.  If you want to be healthier, on the other hand, eat balanced meals and exercise.

;ioasudfh o'sd o0ijhwedfnli]dyf

This is good to know. I have to be at the gym in 26 minutes.

Most important thing I've found for successful exercise, is to make whatever you do 'easy and convenient' enough that you don't mind doing it.  Few people can keep up difficult workouts longer than a few months, but make your activity something you can live with instead of a chore and you'll get more benefit long term because you won't quit.

Exercise helps and is important to health, but if your goal is to lose fat, the most important thing is eating fewer calories!

Low intesity cardio burns fat very well.  Most people just don't have a proper diet to make it effective. This article is informative but didn't even touch on the glycemic index/glycemic load and protein/carb/fat ratio. I feel this is important to understand when people are trying to arrange a diet to lose weight.

Remember, the fastest way to lose weight is suicide.

HAHAHA!  That's awful, Jan Hammer!

L Ron Hubbub - This is good to know. I have to be at the gym in 26 minutes.

I see what you did there.
/You must be a Farker.

//I thought the same thing.
///What's a good workout for shaping knees?

So far I have received a lot more info from these comments than I did from the article. Myths 2 and 3 are easy enough to debunk as pure logic will tell you they are false, but the fat-burning zone is hard for me to deny. It certainly has worked for me, for one reason or another, and many people including doctors still swear it is valid. I think I'd like a source for your information. Is this something you have anecdotally observed or is there some scientific study to base this on?

Jan -
Also remember that all of our astronauts loose all their weight when they are in space. It's simple physics. (weight is the product of mass and gravity)

Re:  the "fat burning zone"...I don't think the author was saying it's non-existent, but rather that it's not a panacea.  The basic formula remains the same, no matter what "zone" you're exercising in:  calories in - calories out = weight gain or loss.  If you do low-intensity workouts, you have to do them for longer to burn the same amount of calories as a higher-intensity workout, and working in the "fat burning zone" isn't a magic bean.

The fat buring zone is deinately a reality and  points to being more efficient in your workout. For example, some people think that peddling the bike faster and harder will make you lose weight faster than a nice easy and steady pace.  Not true.  Think of high octane fuels, the faster and higher performance a car has, the higher the octane(leaner muscle)that car needs.  But for a family sedan, justing doing normal everyday driving, lower octane(not so lean or even fatty)fuel is fine and that's what is burned.  Same with the body. Go faster and harder and burn the high octane muscle mass, not efficient. But, go at a slower pace, build up the cardio and heart rate to a managable level and voila, you'll be buring fat and you'll se results.  That nice easy pace with the right heartrate is the fat burning zone and it has been proven time and again to work efficiently and effectively.  The caveat is that the exercisor needs to be patient and consistent in their workouts.  I'm no expert, but I'm around athletes everyday and I see their workouts and their results daily.  Build your muscle, not burn it and eventually the body becomes a fat burning machine.  But ya got to keep at it.

I would lift weights but I find them heavy...

Fact: women should not lift weights because no one likes muscle-bound chicks.

It's mind-boggling how people will hang on to their favorite lie.  There's only one rule for weight-loss, and it's fairly simple: Burn more calories than you consume, and you'll lose weight.  Period.  People talk about "starvation mode" and "fat burn zones", but it's all nonsense.  It's a simple consumption vs production equation.  If you're eating more calories than you burn, you gain weight.  If you burn more than you eat, you lose weight.  People don't want to acknowledge this because they'd rather blame "metabolism" or "heredity" or ANYTHING other than themselves.  Want to lose weight?  Great, burn more calories than you eat.  It's simple thermodynamics, folks.  There's nothing magic about it.

Let's clear up one misconception posted here by an "expert."  Yes, if you eat late at night and then go to bed, those calories will be converted into fat, since the body's caloric requirement drops considerably when you are asleep.  If the body doesn't need the calories to fuel activity within about six hours, those calories are stored in adipose tissue (aka fat).  Every biology student learns this when studying metabolism.

Bill, I think the point is that the calories get used up the same.  If you eat late at night, sure they get stored as fat.  That fat however is not permanent. What is far more important as to when you eat is how much. Total calorie intake is what one should pay attention to  no matter what, time of day is much lower on the list of priorities. The suggestions to eat in smaller quantities on a more frequent basis has more to do with helping someone eat less.  By doing this, they avoid getting too hungry.

As for the fat burn vs cardio on machines, I always viewed that more of as a time thing.  At fat burn heart rate i can usually work out much longer before tiring, and thus burn more total calories.  While cardio is if I rather wanted to improve my heart and lungs more. In general though, it seems best to me to tailor your effort level to the time you have and your goals.  If your goal is fat burning, then you basically want to work at the hardest level you can for the time you have or are willing to spend on exercise.  If you have plenty of time, the fat burn zone can be best.

Fact: Sharp Knee'd women should avoid lower body workouts.

Your ideas are intriguing to me, and I would like to subscribe to your newsletter. It's alot easier to just be fat.

Glycemic index is the key not calories. You could eat 3000 calories a day of foods with a low glycemic index and still lose weight.

PUT THE FREAKING FORK DOWN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

@ Ken B, Baltimore, Maryland
@ Clint Sanchez

I always train my new clients in the "fat burning zone"
for the reasons that these two people above stated..  if you take a "newbie excersiser"  and thrash them around you will leave them feeling so hungry they could eat a scabby donkey... low heart rates for longer + calorie imput advice is the way to go with begginers.. I have personally proven this with all my clients.. fact

I'm not sure how you can get a better routine than:
Intense core/weight training for 45+ minutes to muscle failure.
Cardio for 20 min after (the fat burning zone).

You burn ridiculous amounts of energy from both muscle stores and fat stores. Do this 3-4 times a week.

I try not to eat after 8:00 pm, mostly for the sake of my heart.  Your heart works very hard during the day if you are an active person.  Bedtime is downtime for the heart.  If you eat a 1/4 lb. burger or a big steak before you go to bed, then the digestion process begins and this causes your heart to work to pump blood to your stomach for digestion to occur. This is time when you're heart should be resting. I'm  25, so this isn't such a huge concern to me yet, but I still take it into consideration.  Once we get into our 30's and up, we especially need to watch this and take good care of our heart.  This is something my Health teacher taught us in college.  

Is there any truth to statement I once heard "that in order to lose one pound of body weight a week and keep it off, you must take your present body weight x 10 and that's how many calories you should consume a day?

WWW.TARIKTYLER.COM ask this guy about training he taught me alot

WWW.TARIKTYLER.COM ask this guy about training he taught me alot!

I'd like to add that high intensity yoga burns some calories, stretches your body, tones your mucsles and pretty much works your core beyond belief. Lots of strenth training here for your whole body, not just countless reps of specific parts. It also works all the systems of the body, and relaxes you in general (after anyway)If you can only do 1 thing regularly other than a walk, try it.

what is "sharp knee'd" and why does this exclude one from working out the lower body?  does this apply to "sharp knee'd" men as well (can men be sharp knee'd?)

I agree with the myth about women lifting weights.  I have been lifting weights for 15 years and am not at all bulky.  I am very toned, shaped and fit.  I love it and receive compliments all the time. Plus, I like the way my clothes fit.

I spend quiet a bit of time explaining to other women that they will not get bulky.  I lift heavy weights with lower reps.  I don't find the light weights with many reps as effective.

People, people, people.
Losing weight is a snap!! Consume less calories than you need and the weight will come off. A healthy diet, consisting of a variety of low fat foods along with low to moderate excercise will result in consistant and regular weight loss. The key is to keep doing it and not giving up after 2 weeks.
Here is a great gauge to consider. How long did it take you to put those extra pounds on? Guess what, it's probably going to take the same amount of time to take it off. DUH!!
If you look like crap it's because that is what your eating and that is the lifestyle that your living. Ever eat a potato with nothing on it? they're actually quite sweet tasting. Try it, I DARE you!!
Remember folks a calorie is simply a measure of energy, just like a cup of milk or a teaspoon of salt.
"No pain no gain" is actually quite true. The "pain" is sticking to it and grabbing an apple instead of a donut; staying on the treadwill for at least 30 minutes 3 times a week; still showing up at the gym a month after you joined; quitting smoking.
Not doing these things results in the real "pain". In the form of high blood pressure, diabetes,a stroke, a heart attack, etc.
Nike is right: JUST DO IT

Since 11/1/07 I've been on a mission to lose the "fat, dumb, and Happy" weight I've gained since last September. I am a Thai kickboxer and I'm at the marital arts studio 3-4x a week.  I've just added 20-30 minutes of cardio (elliptical) every other day (that's the goal).  I'm 5'3", I weigh 158lbs.  Some of the the weight is the added muscle from kickboxing, which I'm totally fine with.  Some is contributed to the ongoing chemotherapy I'm on as a breast cancer survivor.  The other part is the HAPPY weight :-)  I log my calorie input and output on fitday.com and I'm watching the scale move...slowly...but it's moving down.  My goal is simple -trade in my size 10 jeans for a size 8...maybe a 6!

The world of exercise sciences is still in the middle ages. To lose weight, its not only the amount of calories you take in, but how nutritious each bite actually is. Starting your day with a multivitamin is documented to be the best foundation for a weight loss plan.

And the energy you take in also has to match the energy style you push. Cardio requires a highers carb rate of intake compared to the protein needs of a weight lifter for example.

That's our junk food culture at work. Taking in empty calories in potato chips means we're full, but had no nutrients for the brain's needs, and thus we still have hunger cravings. Feed the brain first, and the rest of the body will follow.

We feed our emotions before we take care of the body.
As to the 2,000 calorie per day myth, that figure has been around since world war two and it stems from trying to figure out how to ration food. We don't work in factories or farms anymore, but our exercise culture sadistically tells us to eat that many calories, only to sell you the "plan" to lose weight. It's not about a diet, but truly matching your food needs to your energy output. Reality is that a typical office worker only needs 1,100 calories per day. We eat far too much food for the energy we put out, period.

Fat burning zones are also a pathetic farce. Heart rate is a passive measurement to how much oxygen your body needs totally. For example, if you're on a treadmill, then your heart rate will be higher because your legs are doing the workout. Get on a rowing machine, and your entire body will be doing more integrated work, and therefore your oxygen needs will be higher. But since the workload is spread out to more muscles doing less work each, then your heart rate will measure to be lower because the oxygen is much more evenly distributed to the entire body's demand needs, even though you're doing more work as oxygen is consumed.

The bulking myth for women has been perpetuated because weight training is a cosmetic function only. All of the weight training techniques used by trainers have nothing to do with strength.

Bulk in muscles is actually a deficit to strength in the muscle.

That's the real joke to their supposed knowledge of training. The strongest people in the gym for bulk and size have no flexibility, range of motion, or speed because their routines focus on bulk and size of muscles rather than actual strength.

Sure those guys can leg press or bench press 350 lbs, but they can't play tennis.

If your weight training is focused on optimum range of movement for each muscle instead of weight, you'll be much stronger, but have no bulk to match. Which in the end is a completely different goal.

To develop strength, stay away from weights and focus on using stretch bands instead.  

Another poster noted the sit up myth as well. The sit up as its taught, focuses the strength demand on the muscles of the legs.

The best technique for sit ups is using an inversion table. Ever try a sit up while hanging upside down by your ankles? Just put 5 lbs across your upper chest and try it...

Well Robert, I've got a 185 pound tennis player who has snatched 242 pounds, cleaned & jerked 275 pounds. He didn't get that strong, fast and flexible using bands.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):