Pulse rate 48 and losing weight

[Otto Vask]

What is your pulse rate? Mine seems to be assested on 48
(measured now at 4 pm) since a couple of months, after a one
year soft descending trend. It started to slow down when I
started to swim aerobically seriously (at least 3-4 hours per
week). Does it mean my methabolism is slower then standard?
Does it mean now is harder to lose weight?

Bye, Otto

[Pete Samue]

"Otto Vask" <nospam@iol.it> wrote in message
news:ai8ri0$12f25e$1@ID-50771.news.dfncis.de...
> What is your pulse rate? Mine seems to be assested on 48
> (measured now at
4
> pm) since a couple of months, after a one year soft
> descending trend. It started to slow down when I started to
> swim aerobically seriously (at
least
> 3-4 hours per week). Does it mean my methabolism is slower
> then standard? Does it mean now is harder to lose weight?
>
> Bye, Otto
>
It means you're getting fitter mate.

[Van Bagnol]

In article <ai8ri0$12f25e$1@ID-50771.news.dfncis.de>, "Otto
Vask" <nospam@iol.it> wrote:

> What is your pulse rate? Mine seems to be assested on 48
> (measured now at 4 pm) since a couple of months, after a one
> year soft descending trend. It started to slow down when I
> started to swim aerobically seriously (at least 3-4 hours
> per week). Does it mean my methabolism is slower then
> standard? Does it mean now is harder to lose weight?

A diminishing RHR means that your heart has a greater
stroke volume,
i.e., your heart chambers have become larger and hold a
greater volume of blood, so it takes fewer 'squeezes' to
circulate the same amount of oxygenated blood. This is
known as eccentric hypertrophy and is the result of
aerobic/cardiovascular conditioning.

(The cardiomyopathy known as an 'enlarged heart muscle' is
_concentric_ hypertrophy, where the heart muscle is
thickened only rather than enlarged in all dimensions. The
thicker walls actually decrease the chamber volume and
reduce cardiac output.)

It's not likely your metabolism has slowed; your swimming has
probably increased it as muscle tissue now composes a greater
proportion of your body mass.

It shouldn't be harder to lose weight; on the contrary, you're
in a better position to burn _more_ calories. This is because
at a given heart rate, a heart with a higher stroke volume is
able to pump more blood, and thus provide more oxygen for
muscles to do work. For example, if you're currently swimming
at 80% of your max heart rate now, you're actually swimming
faster and burning more calories than when you swam at 80% MHR
a year or so ago. This is how your aerobic capacity can
increase even though your maximum heart rate can't.

That's not to say it's necessarily _easier_ (more effortless)
to burn more calories. To burn more, well, you'll have to swim
harder or longer, and so your muscles will still have to work
harder. However, it will be less strenuous to your heart and
lungs, so basically you'll perceive less effort if the
intensity of your exercise is limited by aerobic capacity and
more effort if it's limited by muscular strength.

Oh, and my resting heart rate is about 51, BTW.

Van

--
Van Bagnol / v a n at wco dot com / c r l at bagnol dot com
...enjoys - Theatre / Windsurfing / Skydiving / Mountain
Biking ...feels - "Parang lumalakad ako sa loob ng paniginip"
...thinks - "An Error is Not a Mistake ... Unless You Refuse
to Correct It"

[Otto Vask]

"Pete Samuels" <Peter.Samuels@mansella.nospamplease.co.uk> ha
scritto nel messaggio
news:7oS19.83$TZV7.4718749@news2.randori.com...
> >
> It means you're getting fitter mate.

Thanks Pete. I was wandering if it impacts also on the speed
of the methabolism...

O.

[Barry B.]

Pete Samuels wrote:
>
> "Otto Vask" <nospam@iol.it> wrote in message
> news:ai8ri0$12f25e$1@ID-50771.news.dfncis.de...
> > What is your pulse rate? Mine seems to be assested on 48
> > (measured now at
> 4
> > pm) since a couple of months, after a one year soft
> > descending trend. It started to slow down when I started
> > to swim aerobically seriously (at
> least
> > 3-4 hours per week). Does it mean my methabolism is slower
> > then standard? Does it mean now is harder to lose weight?
> >
> > Bye, Otto
> >
> It means you're getting fitter mate.

Good - my pulse rate is also at 48 - my doc made me wear a
heart monitor for a day to ensure it is not a problem, and
hasn't called, so all is OK. :)

[Pete Samue]

"Otto Vask" <nospam@iol.it> wrote in message
news:ai8s4l$121vu8$1@ID-50771.news.dfncis.de...
>
> "Pete Samuels" <Peter.Samuels@mansella.nospamplease.co.uk>
> ha scritto nel messaggio
> news:7oS19.83$TZV7.4718749@news2.randori.com...
> > >
> > It means you're getting fitter mate.
>
> Thanks Pete. I was wandering if it impacts also on the speed
> of the methabolism...
>
Usually (oh dear I'm about to get flamed) the more
exercise you do the faster your metabolism goes, within
limits of course.

The low resting pulse means that the heart muscle is doing
the job efficiently & it just don't need to work harder to
do the job.

Keep up the good work

[Brian D]

On 31 Jul, "Barry B." <bblauer@ford.com> wrote:

> Pete Samuels wrote:
> >
> > "Otto Vask" <nospam@iol.it> wrote in message
> > news:ai8ri0$12f25e$1@ID-50771.news.dfncis.de...
> > > What is your pulse rate? Mine seems to be assested on 48
> > > (measured now at 4 pm) since a couple of months, after a
> > > one year soft descending trend. It started to slow down
> > > when I started to swim aerobically seriously (at least
> > > 3-4 hours per week). Does it mean my methabolism is
> > > slower then standard? Does it mean now is harder to lose
> > > weight?
> > >
> > > Bye, Otto
> > >
> > It means you're getting fitter mate.
>
> Good - my pulse rate is also at 48 - my doc made me wear a
> heart monitor for a day to ensure it is not a problem, and
> hasn't called, so all is OK. :)

Mine got down to 39 when I trained harder, It's now up to 51
8-(

--
Brian D | RiscPC600 | StrongARM 233Mhz RISC OS 4 66Mb Linux
PCs on RISC OS network | <news@duffellb.freeserve.co.uk>
Darlington Dolphin Masters ASC | <www.darlington-masters.org

[Peter Brow]

In article <3D47F5AF.F13CF7AC@ford.com>, "Barry B."
<bblauer@ford.com> wrote:

> my pulse rate is also at 48 - my doc made me wear a heart
> monitor for a day to ensure it is not a problem, and hasn't
> called, so all is OK. :)

Mine's 44 and my doctor has'nt said anything..... Is that
good or bad ;)

--
Please remove no_spam_ to respond directly by e-mail

[Brendan]

44 beats per minute??? That's extremely low.

Brendan

Peter Brown wrote:

> In article <3D47F5AF.F13CF7AC@ford.com>, "Barry B."
> <bblauer@ford.com> wrote:
>
> > my pulse rate is also at 48 - my doc made me wear a heart
> > monitor for a day to ensure it is not a problem, and
> > hasn't called, so all is OK. :)
>
> Mine's 44 and my doctor has'nt said anything..... Is that
> good or bad ;)
>
> --
> Please remove no_spam_ to respond directly by e-mail