Wild swimming is better than indoor swimming

Essentially swimming outdoors, 'wild swimming' normally takes place in rivers or lakes but can also include beaches, caves, and waterfalls rather than in indoor pools. Former politician Matthew Parris has recently courted controversy after swimming across London's River Thames, but is wild swimming, perhaps when undertaken in less polluted or commercially busy waters, a preferable alternative to twenty laps of your local pool?

Wild swimming is better than indoor swimming

Yes because... No because...

It offers a unique swimming experience

you will get eaten :)

Exactly! You don't get much better swimming exorcise than getting chased by a shark...Although this argument is kinda pointless cause even with all the different kinds of swimming they all still still works the same muscles just some focus more so on specific regions of what you wanna work out I suppose.

Since when have the majority of indoor pool users been looking for a unique experience? Swimming pools are used by many community members for leisure, fitness, lessons and socializing. While wild swimming might offer an enhanced aesthetic experience, many swimmers are not seeking it in the first place, and the various attractions of the local pool (convenience, organized groups, competitive swimming etc.) will often far outweigh the pleasantness of a unique outdoor location.

Scotland shares ground

Wild swimming is better than indoor swimming

Yes because... No because...

It's better for you

NASA research in the 1980s discovered that regularly swimming in cold water has numerous health benefits, including lower cholesterol, blood pressure and increased fertility in men and women. Furthermore, the endorphins released when someone plunges into cold water give a 'natural high' to the swimmer, raising his or her mood and heightening his or her senses [[http://www.wildswimming.co.uk/healthbenefits.html]].

Alongside this, travelling to wild swimming locations may involve hiking or further outdoor exercise, while city dwellers can benefit from the cleaner air of the countryside.

UK experience involving cold-hardened winter swimmers indicates that regular swimming in extremely cold water (<10C), has significant health benefits. Winter swimmers have boosted immune systems leading to a 70% reduction in chance of developing cancer and a reduced incidence of infections. On average winter swimmers also generally live an extra 6 years. Contrary to some claims, experience indicates that the physiological adaptation required to swim unprotected in such cold water without harm is permanent. Five minutes immersion once or twice a week is sufficient to enjoy the health benefits.

Finally a recent survey undertaken by the RNLI, Coastguard Agency and RYA found that in the UK some 947,000 poeple swim outdoors all year round, although the survey didn't differentiate between bare-skin swimmers and those wearing wetsuits.

Like all exercise, it is onlly seriously beneficial if done on a regular basis. NASA's 'cold adaptation' benefits occur after a period of frequent outdoor swimming. Unless one is a real fanatic or has a lot of time on his or her hands, it is unlikely that he or she would be able go wild swimming often enough for any significant health benefits.

In contrast, local pools provide year-round locations for people to exercise through swimming, and are often open in evenings and after dark to accomodate people's varied lifestyles. Furthermore, they often offer fitness programmes and scheduled times for people keen on exercising seriously. In this way, local swimming pools offer the accessibility and the facilities for people to exercise effectively in water.

Wild swimming is better than indoor swimming

Yes because... No because...

It encourages greater appreciation and understanding of the environment

Wild Swimming is not merely about swimming outdoors. It is about enjoying the natural environment and wanting to preserve its beauty and charm. By encouraging people to actually explore and immerse themselves in nature; often in highly scenic and remote areas, wild swimming stimulates a greater interest in the British countryside and promotes visitors to specially preserved National Parks and similar sites of great natural beauty. Wild swimmers are encouraged to treat the environment with respect, and while the legal status of outdoor swimming in England and Wales it somewhat ambivalent, prosecution can only occur if damage has been casued. In Scotland, outdoor swimming in inland waters is fully legal so long as the Outdoor Access Code is upheld, and most wild swimmers would be the first to follow a respect for the countryside they enjoy [[http://www.wildswimming.co.uk/accesslaw.html]].

Even if most wild swimmers show concern for the environment, as the sport proliferates, popular wild swimming locations will inevitably suffer from over-use. The Countryside Code's mantra may be 'Take nothing but pictures; leave nothing but footprints', but even tourists' photo opportunities and boot-marks will disrupt habitats and erode the natural environment as more and more swimmers descend upon an area. Allied to this, while swimmers may make every effort to have a minimal environmental impact, even the most diligent of visitors will sometimes leave litter or damage plant-life.

Wild swimming is better than indoor swimming

Yes because... No because...

It is free!

The coalition government has recently scrapped Labour's flagship scheme of free indoor swimming for children and the elderly as part of their unprecedented drive for austerity [[http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/jun/17/job-schemes-cuts-economic-policy]]. Hundreds of thousands of school-kids and pensioners, often with low household incomes, may be prevented from swimming as a result of these recession-driven cuts. Wild swimming offers a cost-effective alternative to leisure centre fees, and will allow both the young and old free access to water activites which they would otherwise have to pay for. Even in urban areas, rivers and lakes, particularly around crossing points, can provide clean, safe bathing and swimming locations, and people can enjoy the health and leisure benefits of swimming free of charge,

The claimed cleanliness of swimming pools is a fallacy. It is not pleasant to swim in water contaminated with pubic hair, faecal particles from unwashed bottoms, vomit, urine, used plasters and toxic chemicals. The dangerous parasite cryptosporidium is chlorine resistant and can survive in a chlorinated pool for up to a week. In one incident some seventy swimmers were infected with crypto after a baby's dirty nappy leaked into a pool.

Firstly, one of the reasons for scrapping free swimming was that, supposedly, 83% of participants would willingly pay to swim at local pools [[http://uk.ibtimes.com/articles/29223/20100617/coalition-government-to-axe-free-swimming-as-part-of-wider-public-sector-cuts.htm]].

Secondly, and more importantly, encouraging free swimming in unguarded, potentially polluted and unsafe waters is an irresponsible practice: in particular, children and old people, who would have otherwise benefitted from free swimming, tend to be the least proficient swimmers and therefore at the greatest risk when wild swimming.

Wild swimming is better than indoor swimming

Yes because... No because...

It is easier to do than ever before

The recent resurgence in wild swimming has been largely thanks to efforts from the 1970s and 1980s onwards to improve the conditions of Britain's waterways and waste disposal. Inland bodies of water are now, for the most part, perfectly suitable for swimming and attract recreational use in ways unthought of thirty years ago.

Secondly, the spread of social media and online networking mean that wild swimming locations can be easily proliferated and whole communities of wild swimmmers can plan places to visit, locations to meet and routes to reach the most secluded spots.

but driveing to an indoor pool is more easy

Wild swimming is better than indoor swimming

Yes because... No because...

It is only a little more risky than swimming in a supervised indoor pool

According to UK drowning stats there is very little difference in the number that drown while swimming in UK rivers and lakes, and those of drownings in supervised pools.

did the uk say that you wouldent get sick from lake water

Wild swimming is better than indoor swimming

Yes because... No because...

Concentrate on stroke instead of flip turns

Swimming in open water allows one to train for actual swimming as opposed to the artificial nature of a chemical pool. Flip turns and other events required in indoor swimming take away from the exercise itself and drain your much needed energy. Outdoor swimming allows one to concentrate on their form and improve it without having to worry about sharing lanes and doing tiring flips every 20 seconds.

Wild swimming is better than indoor swimming

Yes because... No because...

Nature is nature

There are many of facts that are saying that wild swimming is better than an indoor one. Here are some of them. One is feeling. You will never feel in pool like when you swim somewhere outside. It is healthy to swim outside, because when you swim outside you swim in cold water, wich contribute to your circulation. On other side, when you swim inside it is not good because of reason I said. Next one is the thing that swiming outside is free, swiming inside it's not. Also, you will learn to swim better when you swim outside, than when you swim inside.

Wild swimming is better than indoor swimming

Yes because... No because...

It is potentially dangerous

Around 400 people drown each year in the UK, but only a tiny percentage of these do so while swimming, and an even smaller percentage while swimming outdoors [[http://www.wildswimming.co.uk/safety.html]]. Clearly there are risks, as there are with any unsupervised outdoor activity, but with common sense, caution and a decent level of swimming proficiency, they can be mostly avoided.

The claim the wild swimming is dangerous is laughable. One is far more likely to be killed on the lethal UK roads while travelling to a swim, a risk also associated with travelling ever longer distances to indoor facilities as UK local authorities continue to close local pools.

As Matthew Parris found out as he was swept three-quarters of a mile up the Thames, wild swimming is termed 'wild' for a reason: it lacks the safeguards of indoor pools. Parris himself could have posed a serious threat to river traffic in the heart of London, not to mention put himself at the mercy of currents, boats and underwater obstacles [[http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-10852394]].

So long as wild swimming is practiced by the competent few, accidents will be relatively uncommon, but as more and more people choose unguarded outdoor locations, the risk of serious injury or death will rise. Hazards to wild swimmers include currents and tides, unseen obstacles such as rocks and shallow water, various water-borne infections and hypothermia. For all the drawbacks of indoor pools, the fact that they offer a clean and safe swimming environment is an essential benefit they have to swimmers of all ages and abilities, but in particular the young or inexperienced.

Wild swimming is better than indoor swimming

Yes because... No because...

It is heavily dependent on location

The appeal of wild swimming lies partly in the incentive to discover new locations, and to leave the familiar environment. Rather than swimming as part of an exercise routine in the daily grind of everyday life, wild swimming encourages people to abandon the constraints of a hectic, urban lifestyle and to embrace the freedom of the great outdoors, even if only for a brief while. Seen this way, a major attraction of wild swimming is precisely because it is heavily dependent on location: its rewards lie as much in the effort and commitment required to go out and do it, as they do in the swimming itself.

Britain is a predominately urbanized country, and wild swimming is for the most part a rural passtime. Bodies of water in and around cities are often polluted, used for commerical or industrial activities, and don't offer the scenery or closeness to nature which are some of the main appeals of wild swimming. Even if swimmers are fortunate enough to be able to travel to excellent wild swimming locations, they are commonly in remote areas (frequently in National Parks), and without vehicle access. Local pools serve communities throughout the country, and can be easily accessed on foot, by car or public transport: for the vast majority of people, they are the only feasible place for swimmers to enjoy the water in the face of prohibitive financial and time constraints and busy lifestyles.

Wild swimming is better than indoor swimming

Yes because... No because...

Britain doesn't have a climate favourable to outdoor swimming

Most lowland UK waters reach 20C or higher even during a typically poor UK summer, well above the 15C that knowledgable wild swimmers recommend to be the lowest water temp safe for unprotected neophyte open-water swimmers.

There is a reason why, on the rare occasions that Britain is warm enough to compel people to visit the beach, it makes national news. The UK is simply not hot enough often enough for most swimmers to brave outdoor swimming. While the prospect of a refreshing dip on a hot summer's day may sound appealing, the idea of going for a quick swim in the pouring rain in the Yorkshire Dales in January is a significantly less attractive proposition. Quite apart from the very real dangers of hypothermia and cold-shock, it is difficult to imagine anyone but the most hardened fanatics regularly swimming outdoors all year round. For as long as Britain has a temperate climate, most swimmers will stick to heated, usually indoor pools.

Wild swimming is better than indoor swimming

Yes because... No because...

Indoor pools have facilities that wild swimming cannot provide

Swimming pools do not just provide a basin of water for people to move their arms and legs in. Many people swim competitively, in which case, proper racing facilites and lanes are essential, while many other people use swimming pools as places for social activites, during 'splash-hours' for children or times set aside for the elderly. People may use pools as part of their medical recuperation, or as places to pursue dedicated fitness regimes. Moreover, related activities like diving, synchronized swimming or water-polo all require dedicated swimming-pool space for their participation, and even if not everyone makes immediate use of these facilities, a dedicated public pool has the potential to raise their profile and get many more people to take up such sports.

Wild swimming is better than indoor swimming

Yes because... No because...

Wild swimming brings more human damage to ecological systems

When people are encouraged to trek to historically isolated ares for recreation they bring with them all the problems of human/environment interaction. Garbage, chemicals, and other forms of damage to the ecosystem are significant and do not merit the small amount of entertainment value that wild swimming MAY provide over other available forms.

Wild swimming is better than indoor swimming

Yes because... No because...

Lillte or No Visibility

As i lifeguard at a ''wild swimming'' place, I can vouch for that fact that wild swimming can be very dangerous, especially if there is little visibility in the water. You usually cannot see the bottom in the areas that are deep enough to swim, so if you went under, it could take some time to find you, especially if swimming areas are not marked.

Wild swimming is better than indoor swimming

Yes because... No because...

wild lakes have bacteria such as ecoli ect.

swiming in indoor pools is safer than going an swiming in a lake that is most likely infested with bacteria such as ecoli is the most common. but there is cryptosporidum this disese burows in to your intestines and can be life threating .there is also cherrea and it has deadly effects. and why would you realy want to go to freezeing cold water when you have got a heated pool that you can do all the same stuff

Wild swimming is better than indoor swimming

Yes because... No because...

you'll smell like crap

yeah its free and all, but don't ever forget about all the stinking bacteria and moss inside that if you accidently drank some you are more likely to get sick. why take risks by swimming in the wild, especially when the lake, pond, river is not approved to be clean??? If you want to go swim in the wild go ahead nobody is stopping you, you just have to be cautious because anything can get in your body and harm you. Yeah its fun, i swim outside lakes all the time its fun and I only go to the ones that are approved.

Debates > Wild swimming is better than indoor swimming