Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below 
My appologies for reposting this from another forum, but i can GUARANTEE the author doesnt mind... 
*******************************************
Ok, this has been bothering me for ages... i even gave Duchaine shit about this years ago, and he told me to shut my hole and make him a Yohimbine-burger... LOL....
We use, all of us, our heartrate as the test for what level of exertion we are under... and that just doesnt feel right... hear me out.
Many of use CNS stimulants and thermos that raise our resting heart rate, and my 65% exertion marker as far as HR is 134 based upon my VO2 and age/height/weight averages, so take into consideration the following three scenarios.
Scenario One:
I am going to do an hour of fat-fry low impact cardio. I forget my sups, no wallet for my usual liter of espresso and do my cardio 'unassisted'. It takes a certain amount of my physical effor to raise my HR to 133, a certain amount of muscular effort and a certain amount of carbs/fat to fuel that muscular effort.
Scenario Two:
I am on my way to cardio and pop a pair of Trex, a pair of CB and a cup of joe... my resting heart rate is now no longer in the low 60s, but about 88, and it now takes considerably less actual physical effort and actual 'fuel' for my muscular contactions that bring about that effort to bring my HR to my 65%/133bpm.
Scenario Three:
I have just done a gram of great blow, smoked some crisis crank and my resting heart rate is 133. Now i need NO effort, no muscular contractions at all to achieve this HR and am using little or no fuel for my major muscle groups to achieve this elevated heart rate.
Hypothesis:
HR on its own for its own sake is a crappy and wholly useless measure of where your at in terms of exertion level and picking an exertion level based upon heartrate ALONE is just plain.. well... dumb?
Quick Extrapolation of Data by Jerking My Knee:
The only way to find a meaningful % of max effort is to find the increase over un-assisted Resting Heart Rateb that is the product of any CNS Stimulation and then ADD THAT NUMBER to the theoretical 65% number.
Lets take that into consideration with scenario two: if my resting rate is 64 and my stimed up 'resting' rate is 88 then my prime fatburning rate is now no longer 133 but rather the resting rate plus the 24bpm increase?! Is my new fatburing holy grail number 157?!?! Can that be right? if it IS... then watch out Cardiac Unit for the extrap of scenario three...
Ok, in Scenario Three my stimmed up resting rate is a whacked out 133, follow through is that my new 65% number would be.. wait for it... in the area of 210bpm.. nice knowing you all, please give my ipod to AAP and tell my kids i loved them...
Ok, how do we REALLY decide on what is the appropriate level of exertion for fat burning, for cardio stamina training, for peak intervals?
I am confused. I have fallen and cant get up.
*******************************************
Ok, this has been bothering me for ages... i even gave Duchaine shit about this years ago, and he told me to shut my hole and make him a Yohimbine-burger... LOL....
We use, all of us, our heartrate as the test for what level of exertion we are under... and that just doesnt feel right... hear me out.
Many of use CNS stimulants and thermos that raise our resting heart rate, and my 65% exertion marker as far as HR is 134 based upon my VO2 and age/height/weight averages, so take into consideration the following three scenarios.
Scenario One:
I am going to do an hour of fat-fry low impact cardio. I forget my sups, no wallet for my usual liter of espresso and do my cardio 'unassisted'. It takes a certain amount of my physical effor to raise my HR to 133, a certain amount of muscular effort and a certain amount of carbs/fat to fuel that muscular effort.
Scenario Two:
I am on my way to cardio and pop a pair of Trex, a pair of CB and a cup of joe... my resting heart rate is now no longer in the low 60s, but about 88, and it now takes considerably less actual physical effort and actual 'fuel' for my muscular contactions that bring about that effort to bring my HR to my 65%/133bpm.
Scenario Three:
I have just done a gram of great blow, smoked some crisis crank and my resting heart rate is 133. Now i need NO effort, no muscular contractions at all to achieve this HR and am using little or no fuel for my major muscle groups to achieve this elevated heart rate.
Hypothesis:
HR on its own for its own sake is a crappy and wholly useless measure of where your at in terms of exertion level and picking an exertion level based upon heartrate ALONE is just plain.. well... dumb?
Quick Extrapolation of Data by Jerking My Knee:
The only way to find a meaningful % of max effort is to find the increase over un-assisted Resting Heart Rateb that is the product of any CNS Stimulation and then ADD THAT NUMBER to the theoretical 65% number.
Lets take that into consideration with scenario two: if my resting rate is 64 and my stimed up 'resting' rate is 88 then my prime fatburning rate is now no longer 133 but rather the resting rate plus the 24bpm increase?! Is my new fatburing holy grail number 157?!?! Can that be right? if it IS... then watch out Cardiac Unit for the extrap of scenario three...
Ok, in Scenario Three my stimmed up resting rate is a whacked out 133, follow through is that my new 65% number would be.. wait for it... in the area of 210bpm.. nice knowing you all, please give my ipod to AAP and tell my kids i loved them...
Ok, how do we REALLY decide on what is the appropriate level of exertion for fat burning, for cardio stamina training, for peak intervals?
I am confused. I have fallen and cant get up.
Clear your PM's
