Balance is also a speed problem

A man in his sixties, in reasonable health, sat down in Linda's practice recently and asked why his equilibrium is not what it used to be. He had not fallen. Nothing hurt. He simply noticed that standing on one leg to put a sock on had stopped being automatic.

It is a good question, and the honest answer has two halves. One half is his legs. The other half is how quickly the message gets there and back.

There is an article on this site arguing that balance is really a strength problem, and the evidence for that is decent. This is the other side of the same coin, and it is not a contradiction. A balance system is a loop: sense the sway, decide, correct. Strength decides how well you can correct. Speed decides whether the correction arrives in time.

The brain is losing volume, and it starts earlier than people expect

A review in the Postgraduate Medical Journal gathers what is known about how the brain ages, and the opening figure is blunt.

That number surprises most people, not because it is large, but because of where it starts. Forty. Not seventy. The man asking about his sock has been on that curve for twenty-five years without noticing, which is itself the point: the system compensates quietly until something exposes it.

The insulation on the wiring degrades too

Nerves carry signals fast because they are insulated, in a sheath called myelin. Myelin is the reason a signal from your ankle reaches your spinal cord in milliseconds rather than crawling. The review notes that the myelin sheath begins deteriorating after around the age of 40, even in normal healthy ageing, and that the regions myelinated latest in life, in the frontal lobes, appear most affected by white matter lesions. It also flags that not every study agrees on that last part.

Strip insulation off a wire and the signal does not stop. It slows, and it leaks. Which lines up with what the review reports on the cognitive side: slower reaction times, slower processing speeds, lower attentional levels, and losses in sensory and perceptual function.

Now put that back into the sock. Sway is detected slightly later. The decision to correct is made slightly slower. The correction is issued to a muscle that is also weaker than it was. None of those three things is dramatic on its own. Stacked, they are the difference between a wobble and a fall.

The chemistry shifts in a direction that matters for movement

Two details from the review are worth pulling out for anyone working on movement rather than memory.

The first is dopamine. The review describes decline with age in the dopaminergic pathways running between the frontal cortex and the striatum, and explicitly links dopaminergic function to motor performance. This is the same neurotransmitter system that, when it fails severely, produces the movement disorders everybody recognises. Ageing is not that. But it is not moving in the opposite direction either.

The second is brain derived neurotrophic factor, or BDNF, which falls with age alongside serotonin. The review connects BDNF to synaptic plasticity and to the growth of new neurons in the adult brain. In plainer terms, it is part of how a brain rewires itself in response to practice. Less of it does not mean rewiring stops. It means the same amount of practice may buy less change than it did at thirty.

What the review does not say, and it matters here

The part that is actually encouraging

The review lists what appears to protect the ageing brain, and it is a short and unglamorous list: regular exercise, a healthy diet, low to moderate alcohol intake, and cognitive effort in the form of education or occupational attainment. Its own summary is that a healthy life, physically and mentally, may be the best defence available.

Then it says the sentence that is worth the whole read: biological ageing is not tied absolutely to chronological ageing. The date on a passport sets a direction, not a destination.

For the man with the sock, that reframes the problem usefully. His equilibrium is not a fixed quantity issued at birth and drawn down since. It is the output of a system, and several inputs to that system respond to being trained.

What this changes in a treatment room

If part of the problem is signal speed rather than muscle, then balance work built entirely from slow static holds is training only half of it. Standing still on one leg with full attention is a reasonable place to start and a poor place to stay, because nothing in real life waits for you to concentrate.

What tends to matter more, once someone is safe enough for it, is speed and surprise. Reacting rather than holding. Stepping to catch a loss of position instead of trying never to lose it. Doing it while distracted, because a slower attentional system is exactly what the kitchen and the pavement will demand. And underneath all of it, keeping the correction itself strong enough to be worth issuing, which is where the strength argument comes back in.

None of that is tested by the review above, and it is offered here as clinical reasoning rather than as evidence. It is also, not coincidentally, why Linda's own training at seventy plus is loaded, varied and timed rather than careful and still.

Back to all writing