Q: I have heard and read that a slow jogging rate gets rid of more fat than a faster rate does. At my gym, treadmill machines indicate a "fat-burning zone," which is a relatively slow, easy pace. What gives?

A: There is a bit of truth to the statement, but, as far as I am concerned, the theory doesn't make sense to me on closer examination.

Most body energy is stored as fat. An average person has 90,000 to 100,000 fat calories held in reserve for fuel. That large number of calories represents about 80 percent of the body's energy supply.

The second-largest source of energy is carbohydrate (sugar) energy. It is stored in the liver and muscles as glycogen.

It is true that low-intensity exercise derives the greater percentage of its energy from burning fat. A brisk walk, for example, will burn 60 percent of the calories it uses from fat.

High-intensity exercise, like running at a fairly taxing clip, uses glycogen as its major energy fuel. It derives only 40 percent of calorie energy from fat.

The logical conclusion is that low-intensity exercise is the better way to melt fat off the body.

The crux of the matter, however, hinges on how many total calories are used. Say a rigorous bout of exercise burns a total of 1,000 calories. Only 40 percent of those calories comes from fat. That means 400 fat calories are burned. Compare that number of fat calories with less-intense exercise where 300 calories are burned.

One hundred and eighty of those calories are fat calories (60 percent). The total fat-burning is greater in the more intense exercise than it is in the less intense exercise.

The fat-burning zone, I believe, is misleading advice

Good Luck!