Balance & Proprioception Training—Debunked
Balance is the state of equilibrium where your center of gravity is contained within your area of base/support. While standing, if your center of gravity (somewhere between your belly button and spine) stays inside of the borders of your feet, your balance will be maintained, and you will not fall over. This is a learned skill and is largely why toddlers cannot automatically stand.
Balance is a part of many skills, and it is always specific to those skills. Balance is not a general ability. If you learn the necessary balance as a surfboarder, you will not improve your balance as an ice-skater. Likewise, if you learn the required balance as a gymnast, you will not improve your balance as a skateboarder. You will have to devote time to each activity because balance is only improved within the task being practiced.
Therefore, it is important to understand that balance exercises performed within the gym setting do not transfer to other skills as each is task-specific. As an example, single-leg balancing on a BOSU ball will not improve one’s balance as a hockey player—there is no dynamic correspondence (transfer) between these activities. This begs the question: Why are people doing them then? If not mistakenly attempting to improve balance (which cannot be improved in a general sense), then the next common answer to the question is to improve proprioception. Here, the word proprioception is used almost mystically and acts as scapegoat to the conundrum.
Proprioception, or kinesthesia, is the sense or awareness of bodily position and movement. A simple example of this is if you close your eyes, you can (mostly) accurately bring your fingertip to your nose. You can do this without the guidance of your other senses. Think of proprioception as our “sixth sense,” which it is sometimes referred. Now, can we improve the sense of proprioception? First, let’s consider these examples:
->You’re looking at a Where’s Waldo puzzle. You cannot find/see Waldo. I point out where Waldo is in the picture. Now you can see Waldo for yourself. Has your vision improved? Of course not.
->You’re at an orchestra with little knowledge of classical instruments. You find that you cannot decipher the differences within the brass section. I explain that the trumpet is the piercing, highest pitched brass instrument while the tuba is the deepest, lowest pitched. You now begin to differentiate between these two instruments within the music. Has your hearing improved? Of course not.
I could easily create similar examples for your other senses, smell and taste. All the same, these “improvements” will have only occurred due to something that was learned. These are not improvements in the underlying sensory ability, but rather the acquisition of knowledge. For some strange reason, the next example tends to fool exercise professionals:
->You’ve never balanced on a BOSU ball before. You step onto one for the first time and are extremely wobbly and unstable. After ten minutes of practicing, you become increasingly stable and less wobbly. Has your proprioception improved?
The answer is still, “of course not.” In this instance, where the sense of focus is proprioception, the knowledge gained is a part of the motor learning that has occurred during practice. Just as with the other sensory examples, there is no improvement in underlying sensory ability or any neurophysiological change within the proprioceptors that are responsible for your sense of proprioception.
This should lead us to the only logical conclusion: balance and proprioception training is fallacious and completely futile. Intra-task balance can always be improved if that very task is being practiced, but inter-task balance cannot be trained in a general sense. Moreover, the innerworkings responsible for your sense of proprioception are not improved with special exercises. Do not allow your precious gym time to be wasted by such a sham.
This is not all to say that balance cannot be indirectly improved within the gym setting—it can. Think of balance as being the following formula:
Balance = Mobility + Strength/Power + Task-Specific Motor Learning
Time in the gym should be utilized to improve the underlying abilities that improve the acquisition of skill-specific balance such as mobility and strength/power. Then, once you begin practicing the skills that require balance, they will be more quickly learned as you will already have the prerequisite amounts of mobility and strength. A skier or snowboarder with strong legs and mobile hips will learn their respective winter sport (and the balance required therein) at a greater rate than someone who has weak legs and immobile hips. This is another example of how improving abilities tend to enhance skills. Lastly, because this is so common (especially in physical therapy settings), I would be remiss not to point out that the loss of balance within the elderly is just simply the loss of mobility and strength/power.
To concisely conclude, balance and proprioception “training” is based on presuppositions, misconceptions, and a poor understanding of the scientific evidence on the topic. If improved balance is the primary goal, then look to improving mobility, strength/power, and practicing the tasks/skills of interest.
Takeaway Points:
>Balance is not a general ability that can be generally improved or transferred between tasks. Rather, it is automatically and specifically improved when practicing the skills that require it.
>The sensory hardware responsible for proprioception is not improved with special exercises.
>Neither balance nor proprioception training hold up against simple critical thinking, leave alone any deep understanding of the scientific literature.
>Exercises that hope to improve balance and proprioception are largely a waste of valuable resources—time and effort, namely.
>There are underlying abilities that can improve the balance-requiring acquisition of skills such as mobility, strength, and power.