Treadmill or Natural Running.....!!!

[ramleo]

Hi Guys,

Which is better, Natural running or Treadmill running?

(Note:- Natural running means running on ground outside)

Cheers.

Similar Threads:

• Natural Disc Fusion Progression
• fractured proximal humerus - Natural Healing
• Do Fit flops or 'natural' footwear work?
• Causative or natural Arthritis?
• treadmill unweighting

[Physiobase]

Better for what? The question requires more definition to give a more educated and thought through response. 8o

[ramleo]

Sorry about that. Was in a hurry.

Let me rephrase the question.
Compare Treadmill running with natural running? Also Site advantages and disadvantages.

Cheers.

[Nushy99]

The question was still not very clear on what are you talking about, and it's not definite on what you are looking at probably you just wanted to know roughly what others think about advantages and disadvantages of Treadmill running compared with natural running.

** How's the condition of runners and place of running outdoor/indoor, should be more descriptive on what are you talking about**


In my opinion, if runners in both conditions are in good health running in door on even surfaces should be safer than on treadmil 'cause no mechanical errors will be involved when the runners can control their own speed also could slow down at own pace when get tired. On the other hand, running in door on treadmil could be safer to runners comparing to running naturally out door in terms of minimizing the risk to get injured from external factors such as car accidents, uneven foot path (could cause ankle and foot injuries), heat stroke (if the temperature is too high and clothing is not appropriate), etc.

However, if the runners are not in good health eg. diabetic runners - running in door on treadmil should be much safer for them 'cause a more appropriate level of hardness can be programmed and controlled easier than running out door. Disadvantages of running naturally out door for this group of runners should not be much differed from the healthy group.

Hope this could help!

[ramleo]

Thanks for your input.

Lets say for an athlete, the role of treadmill and natural running. Athlete for example, long distance runner, or even Soccer player.

The main difference is that in treadmill the surface moves, and our pace is depended on that. Whereas in natural running pace is controlled by us only. There is also a question of groung reaction force.

Thanks again.

Cheers.

[Nushy99]

The following is just my opinion.....

To increase muscle and cardiovascular endurance at early stage I would say running on treadmill is more advantageous because it's easier to evaluate and control all factors relating to the training eg. speed, slope, time and also frequency of the training. Treadmill running could also minimize risks of getting injuries such as taking too much ground force reactions, getting shin pain from running up/down too fast over the slope, etc.

However, the athlete should be put on treadmill and natural running at some stage of the training. The athlete will be more confident and more familiar with the real venue.

I reckon that an effective training should have an appropriate combination of treadmill and natural training. Running on treadmill and naturally outdoor should not be compared, it's depending on what advantages you are looking for. Which is better ?...it's up to your purpose.

[alophysio]

I still don't understand what you are looking for but i can tell you one thing - it is harder to run at e.g.10kph on land than it is on a treadmill.

If Cardio fitness is desired, run on the ground.

The treadmill is good to control your environment.

Unless the treadmill is where your performance is going to be, wouldn't it be better to train in the situation that you will be performing in?

[Quickstart]

It really depends on what you want to achieve by getting your athlete into a running training programme, and how well the athlete tolerates it. I have a treadmill at home and have personally found it much harder to keep to a 12kph pace on the treadmill compared with overground running (which I can do quite comfortably).

I find running overground much easier than running on a treadmill for many reasons, including:
- Unable to get into a 'natural' rhythm on a treadmill as it is very hard to find a 'comfortable' speed and incline on a machine.
- No wind-chill which often increases sweating and dehydration (or so I have found).
- Completely boring. I love looking at scenery as I run, or I run with others to keep myself occupied, which tends to be difficult running on a treadmill.

As I said before it really depends on the person's own opinions and preferences, but I will try to provide some biomechanical research that compares the two in relation to tibial stress.

I stumbled across an article in the 'British Journal of Sports Medicine' that measured tibial stress in a sample of runners on both asphalt and a treadmill. Essentially the researchers found that: 'tension strain rates were 48-285% higher during overground running than during treadmill running'. This tends to predispose overground runners to tibial stress fractures.

So essentially:
- Running on a treadmill reduces tibial stress, which should theoretically reduce the incidence of tibial stress fractures, but will not lead to the increased bone density that occurs naturally as a result of that same increased stress.

According to this I would be inclined to suggest a programme that incorporates both treadmill and overground running. This way the athlete should get the benefits of both.

If anyone wants to have a closer look at this article, they can find it <a href="http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=0&did=332666941&SrchMode=1&sid=3&Fmt= 4&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=PQD&TS=115381 7743&clientId=20906" target="_new">here</a>

[tapoutqueen]

I regularly run on a treadmill and outside also. They both have pros and cons. I find natural running is easier than treadmill running in fair weather conditions. You can self regulate your speed, speeding up and slowing down when you need to.
I can push myself harder on a treadmill, which has improved my cardiovascular fitness. The downside to the treadmill is it's so boring. I have to find new ways every time to alleviate the boredom.
Running outside in cold weather is much harder. I quickly get breathless and I find it rapidly drains my energy. It takes much longer for my quads to warm up.
Preference wise I prefer running cross county in the late spring, you can't beat it .

[Dr Damien]

I think natural running is better when you consider predisposition to overuse injuries, terrain, ability to change directions etc plus you can adjust your speed automatically. With the threadmill you do not get too many choices. it is cool for people who have a training regime and need to keep it monitored regularly... but nothing beats anything natural.having said that, natural running may have its downsides, horrible terrains etc but the fact that u can change directions easily is crucial.

[davidlee]

Actually running is probably the worst exercise that someone can do. It's bad on the whole body, stressing and pounding the body creating more damage than practically any other exercise. There is not one good results that has any good purpose from running that cannot be gained from safer less stressful exercise. With all the injuries I see caused by running it's ridiculous that professional therapist and doctors keep recommending it (even for knee injuries). But of course people know the dangers of smoking and continue to do it.

[gcoe]

What a load of BS! If that were the case you would expect almost all runners to be plagued with injuries which is simply not the case. Yes running exposes the locomotor system to greater forces that can cause injury than say walking does but being exposed to forces and making adaptions are a normal part of living. In fact those very stressors are actually good for us and make us stronger and become more resilient as lomg as they are in the right dosage and don't overload our system.

If you have good motor skill, train properly on good surfaces with good shoes and don't overdo it you may never have an injury. Running and sprinting are normal variations on locomotion when the demand for speed are high. We evolved to be able to run in order to hunt and avoid becoming Sunday roast.

Problems may occur because we do so little running in real life, then undertake excessive amounts when we lack good skill and our musculoskeletal tissues have not develped through adaption to the stress of running. Or we get obsessed with over exerting our limits.

If you want to talk about something that is really dangerous then look sitting on our tush all day. That is a real health risk and many more of us do that than run.

[davidlee]

You have pointed out every "if". "If you have good motor skill, (If) train properly on (if) good surfaces with (if) good shoes and (if) don't overdo it you MAY never have an injury". Sitting on your tush isn't an exercise. So when you break it down you actually have 5 "If's" and a "maybe". The odds even according to your quote are not very good. As I mentioned it's probably the worst exercise one can do.

Running as you mentioned was short burst not for 26 miles. there probably wasn't an animal that wouldn't catch and eat before the 26 miles and at marathon speed it would be in the first 50 yards in 90% of cases.

Dr Kenneth Cooper who created "aerobics" teaches that you can get the same results with high intensity training in far less time without the stress on the body and joints. "Aerobic Fitness and health may not go hand in hand" Kenneth Cooper. In his book "The Aerobic Way" he explains both but you never hear of high intensity training for cardio. I provide my clients with a better cardiovascular exercise in 4 minutes than you will ever get with running. Running sprints and running up hill is the safet but still leaves the body severely beat up at the end.

As I mentioned earlier. I personally see the injuries in my clients from running that I do not see from any other exercise program. So the fact remains, running is probably the worst according to the injuries.

If you can think of another exercise that is worse please let me know. I'm not arguing the benefits that can be attained from running just that the injuries far out weigh them and the benefits can be attained from a safer exercise.

If you enjoy running, then run. It's a free country:-)

What a load of BS! If that were the case you would expect almost all runners to be plagued with injuries which is simply not the case. Yes running exposes the locomotor system to greater forces that can cause injury than say walking does but being exposed to forces and making adaptions are a normal part of living. In fact those very stressors are actually good for us and make us stronger and become more resilient as lomg as they are in the right dosage and don't overload our system.

If you have good motor skill, train properly on good surfaces with good shoes and don't overdo it you may never have an injury. Running and sprinting are normal variations on locomotion when the demand for speed are high. We evolved to be able to run in order to hunt and avoid becoming Sunday roast.

Problems may occur because we do so little running in real life, then undertake excessive amounts when we lack good skill and our musculoskeletal tissues have not develped through adaption to the stress of running. Or we get obsessed with over exerting our limits.

If you want to talk about something that is really dangerous then look sitting on our tush all day. That is a real health risk and many more of us do that than run.

[gcoe]

Four of the "five ifs" as you quote me are in fact necessary for just about any physical undertaking.

Higher impact physical activity is a risk factor for increased incidence of injury and I wasn't suggesting this is not the case. And I would not be recommending sedentary people who haven't run for a long time take up running as a first choice or without considerable support and medical clearance if warranted. Many of the health benefits of physical activity can be gained from moderate activity like walking or swimming.

BTW Kenneth Cooper has made a career out of popularizing exercise physiology. So I would take some of what he says, as with any exercise guru with a pinch of salt. However he isn't a very good source for bolstering your argument as he advocates running and actually published a book on the topic in the 80s

Early humans probably did both sprint and also run long distances at times - requirements for surviving on the savannah. However I am not saying the conditions of the New York marathon are entirely natural. But humans do all sorts of things that Are not natural and get away with it. We go into outer space for months at a time, swim incredibly long distances, parachute off rock faces, mountain climb etc etc you get my point. All these activities have huge inherent risks. It is part of being human is it not?

So why pick on poor old mundane runners? And to equate running with smoking????? That is bordering on the obscene. With an attiude like that may the Giant Spaghetti Monster in the sky help any poor unsuspecting runner who fronts up to your clinic

However thanks for the idea about the "5 Ifs and a Maybe" Quite catchy really! I might use it for the title of my upcoming book.

[Sole Man]

Early humans probably did both sprint and also run long distances at times - requirements for surviving on the savannah.

Undoubtedly - one of the not so blissful realities of the hunter gatherer existence was that whatever you hunt moves away from you, and whatever you gather soon runs out in the local area. I can see many situations where people might have had to run for hours at a time.

[jiminykricket]

personally i prefer running outside compared to running on one of those treadmills but i suppose when its cold and dark outside you probably have to use a tread.