As a physiotherapist, I often work with patients who want to improve their core strength, and many of them arrive influenced by popular fitness trends in the media. One such example is the article published by Metro (2025), titled “This is how long you should be able to hold a plank according to your age” (linked at the end of this blog). Although the intention behind the article may be to encourage physical activity, I find that the information it presents is overly simplistic, lacking in scientific rigour, and potentially counterproductive — both physically and psychologically.
Unsupported Arbitrary Benchmarks
The article suggests that people should be able to hold a plank for specific durations depending on their age group. However, it provides no reference to peer-reviewed research, professional guidelines, or recognised fitness standards. As a physiotherapist, I find this somewhat worrying. Exercise prescription should always be evidence-based and tailored to individual needs, not based on arbitrary numbers. Research highlights that average plank durations can vary significantly within age groups, depending on sex, training history, and individual physiology. Without consideration for such factors, these benchmarks are of limited clinical or practical value.
Risk of Poor Technique and Injury
Promoting long-duration static planks without reference to correct technique or an individual’s physical readiness could lead to biomechanical compensations, such as lumbar extension. These compensations could increase the risk of musculoskeletal strain, particularly in the lumbar spine and shoulders. From a physiotherapy perspective, we prioritise quality over quantity to make exercise the most effective for the individual. For example, a well-performed 10-second plank repeated in intervals is often more effective than holding a poor-form plank for several minutes. Technique should never be sacrificed for time.
Ignoring Functional Fitness and Individual Needs
The idea that core strength can be adequately assessed by the ability to hold a plank for a set time undermines the broader principles of functional fitness. Core stability is dynamic by nature and should support a range of everyday movements — from lifting and twisting to posture maintenance. Relying solely on static measures like a plank duration fails to consider the multidimensional role of the core. At Head2Toe, we incorporate functional assessments and a variety of core exercises that better reflect the demands of each person’s lifestyle or occupation. A 50-year-old office worker and a 50-year-old recreational runner will likely have different functional requirements, regardless of age.
Potential for Psychological Harm
Prescribing ideal durations by age group, as the Metro article does, may inadvertently discourage people who cannot meet these benchmarks. In our clinic, one of the key goals is to build confidence and promote adherence with exercises. When patients compare themselves against unrealistic or irrelevant standards, they may feel disheartened or embarrassed, which undermines their motivation to engage in physical activity. A more supportive and person-centred approach involves setting progressive, attainable goals based on individual starting points, not population-wide averages.
From a physiotherapy standpoint, the plank can be a useful tool in core conditioning, but its application must be personalised, goal-oriented, and focused on technique. The Metro article’s age-based duration recommendations lack scientific validity, disregard biomechanical safety, and fail to respect individual variability. Public health messaging should empower individuals to improve their fitness safely and sustainably — which requires more than broad, unreferenced benchmarks.
Metro news article link:
https://metro.co.uk/2025/05/02/this-long-able-hold-a-plank-according-age-23015002/
Blog post guest written by Evie Spreadbury, Physiotherapist.
References
Chase, K. A., Brigham, C. E., Peterson, J. T., & Coste, S. C. (2014). Fitness norms for the plank exercise. International Journal of Exercise Science: Conference Proceedings, 8(2), Article 14.
McGill, S. M. (2010). Ultimate Back Fitness and Performance (4th ed.). Backfitpro Inc.
