The Key to Longevity Was at Our Feet - Something Health Checkups Can't Reveal? The Speed at Which You Stand Up from a Chair Indicates Your "Body's Reserve Capacity"

The Key to Longevity Was at Our Feet - Something Health Checkups Can't Reveal? The Speed at Which You Stand Up from a Chair Indicates Your "Body's Reserve Capacity"

The Current State of Aging Reflected in "Standing on One Leg"—The Connection Between "Mobility Power" and Mortality Risk Seen in a Study of 13,423 People

How many seconds can you stand on one leg? How smoothly can you stand up from a chair, change direction a few steps away, and return?

These seemingly simple movements are not just tests of physical ability. They require the integration of muscle strength, balance, agility, cardiorespiratory endurance, coordination between nerves and muscles, and the ability to respond to changes in the environment. A large-scale study targeting elderly people in Taiwan demonstrated a clear connection between this "mobility power" and subsequent survival.

The results are impressive, but simplifying them to "if you can stand on one leg, you can live longer" misinterprets the study's significance. Let's distinguish between what the numbers truly convey and how they have been perceived on social media.


A Large-Scale Study Tracking 13,423 People Over Seven Years

The study was published in the medical journal "JAMA Network Open" in August 2026. It involved 13,423 men and women aged 65 and over living in Taiwan, with an average age of 72.9 years, and 62.5% were women. Participants underwent standardized physical fitness tests between 2015 and 2016, and their data were linked to Taiwan's public health insurance and death registry records. The median follow-up period was 7.0 years, during which 1,631 participants, or 12.2% of the total, died.

The tests measured seven events across four domains: cardiorespiratory endurance, muscle strength, flexibility, and balance and agility.

Cardiorespiratory endurance was assessed using a "2-minute step test," where participants raised their knees to a specified height. Muscle strength was measured by the "arm curl," which counted how many times a dumbbell of a specified weight could be lifted in 30 seconds, and the "chair stand," which counted how many times participants could stand up from a chair in 30 seconds with arms crossed in front of their chest.

Flexibility was measured using a test to bring both hands closer together behind the back and a test to reach towards the toes while sitting with one leg extended. Balance and agility were evaluated with a one-leg stand with eyes open for up to 30 seconds and the "8-foot up-and-go," which timed how long it took to stand from a chair, walk around a marker 8 feet (about 2.44 meters) away, and return to sit.

Participants were divided into five groups based on their performance by gender. The research team statistically adjusted for age, gender, BMI, self-reported exercise habits, socioeconomic factors such as income and education, residential area, and medical history including hypertension, diabetes, heart disease, and chronic kidney disease to examine the relationship between physical fitness and all-cause mortality.


The Greatest Difference Was in the Ability to "Stand, Walk, Turn, and Return"

The strongest correlation among individual events was seen with the 8-foot up-and-go. The group with the best performance had a 59% lower adjusted hazard of all-cause mortality compared to the group with the lowest performance. For the one-leg stand, it was 50% lower, for the 30-second chair stand, it was 45% lower, and for the 2-minute step test, it was 42% lower.

The arm curl, which measures upper body muscle strength, and flexibility tests also showed a correlation with mortality risk, but not as strongly as balance and agility, lower body muscle strength, and cardiorespiratory endurance. Furthermore, the comprehensive fitness index, which integrated all seven events, showed a 61% lower mortality hazard for the top 20% compared to the bottom 20%, a larger difference than any single test.

It's important to note the meaning of the numbers 59% and 61%. This does not mean "life expectancy increased by 59%" or "59 points fewer people died." It is a relative value comparing the likelihood of death during the follow-up period to the lowest group after adjusting for various conditions. It is also not a number that predicts an individual's remaining lifespan.

Nevertheless, the point that the risk of death gradually decreases as performance improves across multiple events is significant. Simple movements may reflect physical conditions that cannot be fully captured by disease names or test values.


Why "Mobility Power" Reflects Health Status

Standing on one leg may seem like a test of balance alone at first glance. However, it actually requires muscle strength in the ankles, knees, and hips, information from the eyes and inner ears, sensations from the soles of the feet, and the nervous system's ability to instantly correct posture.

The 8-foot up-and-go is even more complex. It involves lifting the body from a chair, starting to walk, decelerating, changing direction, walking again, and sitting accurately. Essential daily movements are packed into a short period. The chair stand reflects lower body muscle strength and power, while the 2-minute step test reflects the ability to keep moving for a certain period.

Researchers focus on how these performances indicate a part of "physical reserve." Blood pressure, blood sugar levels, and lists of diseases inform us of what problems exist in the body. In contrast, physical fitness tests show how much function remains and how well one can cope with daily stress and unexpected fluctuations. They are not competing views but different windows into health status.

If balance and leg strength decline, the risk of falls and fractures increases. Even if falls are avoided, fear of going out may reduce activity levels, leading to further muscle loss in a vicious cycle. Conversely, maintaining the ability to stand, walk, and change direction makes it easier to continue shopping and interacting with others, contributing to independent living. It is more natural to think of "mobility power" as existing at the intersection of multiple health factors, rather than as a single switch directly affecting mortality.


"Higher Isn't Always Better"

The analysis suggested that continuously improving records in all items does not necessarily lead to a continuous decrease in mortality risk. For example, in the 30-second chair stand for men, the correlation became more moderate around 15 repetitions. In the 8-foot up-and-go for women, the improvement margin tended to decrease around 7-8 seconds. While escaping extremely low flexibility seems meaningful, exceeding a certain range of flexibility does not necessarily lead to additional survival benefits.

However, these numbers should not be taken as a common "passing line" for everyone. The study used gender-specific distributions and statistical models, and safe goals vary depending on age, body size, chronic conditions, joint status, and medication. The important thing is not to compete for top records but for those with particularly low fitness levels to aim for gradual improvement without overexertion. In the study, the difference in mortality risk was most noticeable between the bottom 20% and the groups above them.


On Social Media: "Want to Try Now" vs. "Correlation Is Not Causation"

This study became a topic of discussion on social media and online communities due to its simplicity and the fact that it can be tried in a short time without specialized equipment. As of September 3, 2026, public posts can be broadly categorized into three reactions.

The first reaction is "I want to try it myself." Standing on one leg and standing up from a chair are more intuitive than blood test numbers. Some posts connected the research with the everyday realization that putting on pants while standing becomes difficult with age, serving as an entry point to consider the news as a personal health issue.

The second reaction is empathy towards the concept of health evaluation itself. On LinkedIn, there was a shared understanding that lists of diseases indicate "what's wrong," while fitness tests indicate "what can be done." The fact that the comprehensive index of seven events showed a stronger correlation than individual events led to the perception that health should be considered a "portfolio" combining strength, endurance, and balance, rather than a single record. There were also voices appreciating the ability to understand one's current state without expensive equipment or wearable devices.

The third reaction is caution against oversimplified headlines. Questions like "Does practicing standing on one leg directly reduce mortality risk?" were raised on Facebook, and on Threads, it was noted that the test results only showed a correlation and did not prove that standing on one leg itself prevents death. In online forums focused on longevity, while the test was welcomed as an easy-to-implement indicator, there was also a shared view that we should not forget the reverse explanation that healthy individuals could achieve good results.

These are not randomly sampled public opinions but qualitatively observed public posts centered on the English-speaking world found through searches. The number of reactions changes over time, so they do not represent the opinions of society as a whole. However, the appeal of "easy to understand, thus easy to act on" and the danger of "easy to misunderstand causality because it's easy to understand" are simultaneously evident.


Can Practicing Standing on One Leg Alone Lead to Longevity?

In conclusion, this study alone cannot say so. It is an observational study that examined the relationship between initially measured physical fitness and subsequent mortality, not a clinical trial that assigned exercise to participants.

People with high physical fitness may have originally had fewer illnesses, better nutrition, sleep, social connections, and access to healthcare. Although the study adjusted for many factors, there was no data on smoking history, and the influence of unmeasured factors could not be completely excluded. Physical fitness was measured only once, and changes over the seven years were not tracked.

Participants were community residents who could complete the seven events at the measurement venue, and the results may not directly apply to bedridden individuals or those with severe illnesses. Analysis by cause of death was also not conducted. Therefore, this test is neither a diagnostic method nor a tool for predicting lifespan.

However, it does not mean that exercises including balance and functional movements are meaningless. A Cochrane systematic review targeting community-dwelling elderly showed that programs focusing on balance and functional exercises reduced fall rates by 24%. The Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare's "Physical Activity and Exercise Guide for Health Promotion 2023" also recommends that elderly people engage in multi-component exercises combining strength, balance, and flexibility at least three days a week, and strength training two to three days a week. Again, the key is the combination, not an overemphasis on one event.


Using Numbers as "Clues for Change" Rather Than "Judgment"

If trying standing on one leg at home, ensure there is a place like a wall or stable chair to hold onto immediately. Those with a history of falls, severe dizziness, pain or numbness in the legs, or cardiopulmonary disease should not attempt to push their limits alone and should consult a doctor or physical therapist for safety. The study's tests were also conducted with explanations, practice, and safety confirmation by trained assessors.

There is no need to be elated or disheartened by a single performance. Changes such as a sudden increase in left-right differences, taking longer to stand up, becoming unstable when changing direction, or avoiding going out may be more practical cues to consult healthcare providers.

When starting exercise, combine daily walking and aerobic exercise with safe standing practice from a chair, strength training under expert guidance, and balance exercises with support, tailored to the individual's fitness level. There is no need to endure pain or worsening health conditions. Taking realistic steps like "moving a little more than now" is more important than competing for records.


Not Measuring Aging Solely by "What Is Lost"

The biggest question posed by this study is not just how many seconds one can stand on one leg. It questions whether we have evaluated health in old age solely by "losses" such as disease names, the number of medications, and abnormal values.

Of course, blood tests, imaging diagnostics, and chronic disease management are indispensable. However, simultaneously observing "whether one can stand on their own," "whether one can change direction stably," and "whether one can keep moving for a while" makes the picture of aging more three-dimensional.

Short physical fitness tests do not predict lifespan. Nonetheless, they can serve as an entry point to early detect small changes in the body and connect to actions that protect daily functions. Instead of seeking the secret to longevity in a single movement, comprehensively nurturing strength, balance, agility, and endurance is the most practical message to take from this study.


Source URL

Related Articles