If you follow the recent health headlines, then there's no doubt you've heard about these new weight loss medications. Everybody has. You've also probably heard a bunch of people talking about how they will make you lose way too much muscle and you'll actually be worse off than when you started. Is that true? Well, tune in today as we dive into the nuance of this question, and I'll give you the real take on what's going on with these meds. Welcome back to the "In Truly Building and Life-Laying Athletes" podcast. Thanks so much for stopping by. For those of you who haven't met me yet, my name is Jordan Reineke. I'm a dual board certified physician in family and sports medicine. And the goal of this podcast, help keep you active and healthy for life through actual M&M's of hormone medication. Today we're gonna be looking all about losing weight, body composition, so let's dive into it. So first things first, let's talk about just an introduction, right? So weight, and I understand everyone talks about weight. They talk about BMI and weight, it's very important, but weight is much more than a number, right? It's really important to understand that weight is much more than just a number on the scale. And what I mean by that is, yeah, we have a scale. It's a crude metric to measure how much we quote unquote weigh but it's way different than that. The focus would really be on what makes up that weight, specifically changes in fat mass and lean mass during weight loss. And this podcast here is gonna dive into how different weight loss approaches impact body composition. So specifically we're looking at classic lifestyle changes, things like diet and exercise, the new GLP-1 type medications and GIP, and then bariatric surgery. And yeah, we're looking overall, what does it look like when you lose weight with each one of these? Do they have similarities? Are they significantly different? And once again, stepping back here, I know that weight can be a big issue and a really touchy subject for a lot of people. So I wanna be conscious of that, but we have to talk about it's important for our health and so we're gonna do it. So first of all, how do we measure body composition? I just said like, hey, weight's not everything. What that mean? I mean, is that weight is important? Absolutely. But body composition is probably more important, right? Body composition is how is that weight made up? Meaning lean tissue and non-lean tissue, things like bone, fat mass, muscle mass, all those things. And we wanna measure that. How do we measure that? We have multiple ways of doing that. We have a couple of different ones here and we'll go through them one by one. The first one we're gonna talk about is DEXA. So DEXA scan is X-ray technology. This is pretty much the gold standard. You can get this a lot of different places. It's relatively affordable. It's standardized. You can get info on bone density, lean tissue, fat mass, and it's a pretty low radiation. So really like DEXA is kind of the quote unquote, practical gold standard. There's probably another one we'll talk about MRI that's like the gold standard for the best one, but for the best bang for your buck and reproducibility, DEXA is pretty much it. Then we have a biological impedance, which a lot of times you step on a scale and it puts electricity through you and you don't feel it, but it measures how much weight's going on. Maybe you have some hand grips as well. It's very simple, easy, it's decent. It's not the best. It's impacted by a ton of things like your skin temperature, your hydration status, all this stuff. We see this in studies quite a bit as well. Not quite as good as DEXA, but hey, if it's got, if you have it and that's fine, that's a big thing here. The thing I care most about is having a repeatable way of doing it, right? If you did DEXA, stick with DEXA. If you did bilectro impedance, probably stick with that. That'll probably be more helpful in the longterm, but yeah, that's another way we talk about there. Then we have MRI. MRI is amazingly accurate. It's awesome, pretty much just made for research as it's just impractical, right? Nobody's gonna go and get an MRI for their body composition purposes, right? It's gonna take a long time. It's gonna be really expensive and that's just really not what we're doing, but it is the best. It's so good and you get very good detail. And so it's probably our best one overall, but just so impractical, no one really does it. Then we have water densiometry, which is this kind of has some variable results. It is kind of dependent on user performance as well. You have to go underwater, see how much water is displaced, all that stuff. You can't really determine visceral fat, meaning fat on the organs, and you have to be able-bodied to go underwater to do this. And so this one's not nearly as big anymore. And there's also air displacement, which is the bod pod. This is better for those with mobility issues. This also can have a decently high cost. You can't localize where that fat tissue is once again, and not great in the setting of people with very high obesity. And then finally we have skin calipers, which is where you're grabbing certain spots of the body and determining how much subcutaneous tissue you have and fat, and it's very, very, very user dependent and variable in that one. Skin calipers are, unless you're really, really trained to do those over and over and over again, they're not fantastic. But we have quite a few ways of doing that. We're gonna talk mostly about DEXA today, 'cause in the research world, that's what we're looking at. I just wanted to let you know there are multiple ways to measure body composition and body fat. This isn't even including just getting simple measurements, right, like a waist to hip ratio, or just a waist ratio or hip ratio, any of those things. Those also count as well. The other ones give us information in terms of where the fat is stored, all that stuff, and those don't necessarily do that, but there's lots of ways to do it, and so I just wanted to mention them at least. And so body composition and health outcomes, why do we care, right? Well, it's important to understand that body composition does matter. It's actually crucial for things, and there was a paper looked at, a 2024 review by Carter and colleagues, and using data from the American Society for Metabolic Embryotic Surgery, it highlights a strong connection with body fat and mortality, meaning for every 10% increase in body fat percentage, in adults, there was a 11% higher chance of mortality. So we're talking, hey, as your body fat percentage goes up, there is a direct link to mortality. And once again, these are observational, and that's not necessarily causative, but we're seeing that, yeah, it's definitely associated. We also found that a five-kilogram increase in fat mass was associated with a 60% higher hazard ratio for mortality, so once again, it seems to be going. And there may actually be something called a J-shaped curve. So J-shaped association is where you essentially see, you know, if you have no fat whatsoever, you might have higher mortality, then you get a little bit on you, and you kind of have that protection, and then when you go up again, you tend to have worse outcomes. That's kind of J-shaped, and that seems reasonable, and we see that in the literature as well, that there's kind of this J-shaped association between body fat and mortality with the lowest risk of everything being around 25% body fat. So if you're 18, 17, you're probably a little bit higher risk, whereas when you get 25, that's kind of there. And we've seen that time and time again in literature, and that might just be due to geriatrics. As you age, having more mass might help you withstand more insults or injuries or illnesses, stuff like that, but that's kind of how it goes. So it kind of suggests, though, that having a sweet spot there, or have a little bit of body fat, not too much, not too little, that's where it goes. And overall, yeah, it's important to mention body composition, because it can affect people's quality and quantity of lives, right? So it's affecting not only how long you live, but how robust you are in those years. And so that's why we care so much about these, and I wanted to mention it. Moving on to the different types of where fat is stored, this is really important as well. So you might have heard visceral versus subcutaneous fat. And visceral is the fat surrounding your organs. So think about the liver. When we talk about fatty liver, that's what we think about all the time. That's probably the number one example that I see. You know, you get someone who has obesity and type 2 diabetes, and then you check their labs, and you look at the liver numbers, and they're probably gonna be elevated, 'cause they probably have some fat in it. And that's probably what it is. But visceral fat is the fat that is around your organs, and it's not good. Spoiler alert, not good. That is like the worst type of fat for us in terms of deposition. That tends to have worse metabolic markers and outcomes and health outcomes, all that stuff. And whereas we have subcutaneous as kind of the fat underneath the tissue, and actually may have some sort of protective effects. Either way, even if it's not protective, it doesn't seem nearly as bad as the visceral adipose tissue. And those are linked to higher mortality, like I said. And so overall, we care much more than just about the total amount of fat, but also where it is located, because it does make a difference. And the limitations of BMI, we'll talk about BMI. BMI is used as a tool in clinical practice, right? But it does not provide the whole picture, right? So it doesn't actually tell us anything about the total or actual composition of the weight, rather it's muscle versus fat. And as I mentioned before, that distinction between fat and muscle is crucial. And BMI can be useful. It's absolutely useful at a population level. It doesn't provide the granularity we need at the individual patient level. And it's a starting point, not the be all end belt. So some people will say, "Oh, BMI doesn't matter, 'cause I'm really jacked and strong." I will tell you what, I can probably count on literally one hand, the amount of times where my BMI has been elevated to very high overweight or obese, and I've walked in like, "Oh, snap, like dude's actually jacked, like that is it." That does not happen. That is not what's happened. Actually what happens more often is people are in the quote unquote normal BMI range, and they actually have way more fat than they should, and they're under muscled, and they're actually very metabolically unhealthy. And so when people say it's biased against people who are overweight, like that's, I don't think that's true at all. That being said, it's biased both ways, and it's not great. And so we use it as a general tool, a screening tool, right? So if someone comes in and a BMI is 55, like there's no way of having a healthy body composition when your BMI is 55, like you just can't do it. So it's very simple in that regard. If you see, you know, 35, 40 upper there, like nobody's gonna be metabolically healthy in that situation. That being said, if your BMI is, you know, 25 to 30, where it's like overweight, well then yeah, there's lots of ways where you can be healthy and do that as well. My whole life I've pretty much lived in that overweight category, and not to sound like the beacon of health, but you know, you can have that with someone who's fit, and does that just kind of mean, it doesn't necessarily mean like, hey, if you went from a, you know, a 27 to a 24, like you're gonna be drastically healthier, that's not necessarily the case. So as with most things, there's lots of nuance. I'll use BMI as a screener 'cause we get it with height and weight. That's what it is. You look at it, and then you say, hey, does this line up? And if it doesn't, then okay, cool, we can throw out the window. We can do something else, whether it's a waist-to-hip ratio or something like that. It's just something to consider. So I wanted to mention that BMI, it's there. It can be practical, but you gotta kind of use it with a little bit of nuance. And first let's talk about traditional weight loss now here in body composition. So what happens to fat and lean mass when you lose weight through diet exercise? There's been a bunch of different studies looking at there, looking at the, and kind of looked at multiple of them. We looked at one study specifically, looked at body composition changes using DEXA scans over three years, and these participants followed an energy-reduced Mediterranean diet, so calorie-reduced Mediterranean diet, and were encouraged to do physical activity as well. And the intervention group experienced a significant loss in total fat mass, both in percentage and absolute amount, and decreased in visceral fat as well. However, they also experienced a small loss of lean mass, about 300 grams in the first year, with continued, though slower, decline over the next two years. And there was some regain of the fat mass over the next two years as well. And despite this, though, the ratio of lean mass to fat mass did improve in the intervention group. So what that means is, hey, they lost fat mass, they lost lean mass, but they seem to lose more fat mass than lean mass, so their overall proportion improved, and that's pretty good. And it does suggest that, yes, you can lose both these things and it will happen. And they also mentioned in the study specifically, they had some age-related differences. So younger participants had bigger initial changes in body composition, but they were less sustainable, and whereas the older participants had a more gradual but steadier shift, and it may suggest that a slower, more gradual approach to lifestyle changes might be better, it said, for older patients, but that might, I could argue, for almost anybody, specifically, if you're looking for long-term retention. And this is kind of just the overall scheme I want you to think about, is when you lose weight, you will lose fat and you will lose muscle. I guess I should say specifically, you will lose lean tissue. So we don't know, a lean tissue could be anything, right? It could be glycogen storage, could be water, could be muscle, it could be bone, who knows what, but you will lose lean tissue and you will lose fat tissue. Like, that is going to happen. Unless you're like some freak where you're in a very, very, very smart, low deficit and you're having tons of protein, like maybe you just change the body composition a little bit, but even then, that's extreme use cases, but if you're losing any amount of appreciable weight, you're going to have a little bit of loss of both. So that's very, very normal, and I want to just say that and get that out there. Most people are like, "Oh, I don't think about it." That's what's happening. There is kind of this quarter fat-free mass rule. So overall, it's kind of generally suggested that about 25% of weight loss tends to be fat-free mass. So as I mentioned, fat-free mass is not necessarily muscle. It can be water, it can be liver glycogen, muscle glycogen, it can be muscle, it can be bone, it can be all these things that aren't fat, so not fat. That's what fat-free mass is essentially. You could lose that. So about 25% weight loss tends to be fat-free mass. And that's like the general claim. There's another article I looked at here. It kind of clarifies it's not a hard and fast rule. And I, once again, like most things, of course it's not going to be hard and fast, right? There are definitely things that will affect it. So my portion is going to depend on lots of things like your initial body fat and restrictiveness of the diet, meaning how intense the diet is. Definitely not a one-size-fits-all concept, but interestingly enough, people with obesity may actually have a protein sparing effect kind of during calorie restriction, where they lose a smaller proportion of lean mass compared to those in normal weight. And so as things are going to change, where you start, if you have more fat tissue, if you have a huge calorie deficit, those are all going to change, right? And we'll see that in the studies as well. But overall, generally, if you're not going insane, 25% is kind of a ballpark range, and it'll be very different for every person, but like 25 is reasonable. When we think about that, it'll span us to like 35, 15, kind of plus or minus 10, what we generally think about there. And additionally, we talked about just that Mediterranean diet, right? They kind of said, "Hey, you can exercise, but you're gonna lose weight." What happens if you actually focus on exercise? Well, I saw a 2010 trial that I was looking at that compared diet alone to diet plus physical activity in severely obese adults over a year. And surprisingly, there wasn't a big difference between the two groups in terms of total weight loss, waist circumference, visceral or liver fat. And so this does suggest that diet plays a huge role, right? And is the big thing. It's probably the most important factor to weight loss. And I'll say this time and time again, people are like, "Ah, I'll start losing weight. I need to start exercising." I want you to exercise. I always want you to exercise. I want you to exercise now and forever until the day you die. I want you to exercise. But if we're looking at it seriously from the literature, your best chance of losing weight is to fix your diet. That's really what it comes down to. Like you really can't outrun a bad diet. Can it be helpful? Absolutely, for so many reasons. You should exercise literally just because it's so good for everything. And then if weight loss is a benefit, that's fantastic. But diet is gonna be huge. And that's what they mentioned here. If you exercise or didn't, didn't really matter for overall stuff, but very, very important. But there was another study looked at, a 2021 overview, as a systematic review and analysis. And they found that all types of exercise, aerobic, resistance, high intensity interval, were tied to more weight loss compared to no exercise. And so there's different ones that say, "Hey, is it yes? Is it no?" You probably will get more weight loss with exercise. That's just, you burn off some more calories. That's probably gonna happen. But then, you know, you may have an adaptive response to that. That's needed here and out there. But specifically, diet is gonna be the biggest thing. But regarding preserving lean muscle mass, right? So these studies found that resistance training specifically can significantly help reduce the lean mass loss during these weight loss periods. That's the big thing. And exercise didn't seem to be the biggest thing in maintaining weight loss, but in terms of maintaining body composition, huge thing was resistance training. And so the key takeaway here is gonna be that we do recommend combining dietary changes with resistance training. We want aerobic as well, 'cause that's just part of being a healthy person. But if we're really trying to hold onto that muscle, we want resistance training. So that's the big thing we've seen. And we've mentioned that time and time again. That's really important. So now I wanna talk about body composition changes with these GLP-1 or GIP receptors. So specifically semiglutide and terzepatide. These are the ones everyone's talking about, right? They are huge. And, you know, everyone's seen them. They're online. Literally every ad in the world's like, "Compounded semiglutide, compounded terzepatide." And they're everywhere. And they're everywhere because they work. They're really good. They are showing impressive weight loss results. Specifically, we go back to the STEP-1 trial in 2021. Semiglutide, 2.4 milligrams. It showed a significant weight loss, almost 15% of weight loss total versus just over 2% with a placebo. But this is where kind of everything came from. They found in that study that about 45% of the loss was from lean mass. And this is what started the panic, right? When people saw 45%, like, "Whoa, that's way bigger than the quarter rule. Oh my gosh, what's going on?" Hover, this has not necessarily panned out. And as we've said before, there's lots of differences for lots of different people. There's been other trials that have been done and meta-analyses show that they've been, studies claiming anywhere between 0% and 40% reduction in fat. As I mentioned, zero's probably not gonna be expected, but 40%, that's on the higher end. However, most of these data show an overall improved ratio to fat mass, to lean mass. So as I'm stepping back here, some studies saw like pretty much, if they did resistance training or whatever they saw, no real change in their fat mass, I would still expect to see fat mass loss or lean tissue loss. I would still expect to see that, so that might be an anomaly, but anywhere from zero to 45, that's a big range, right? So zero to 40, kind of that ballpark. So that's what we've seen overall, which means we have lots of people who didn't lose a lot, other people who did. But regardless, most of the data still shows a favorable improvement of the fat mass to lean mass ratio, meaning they still lost more fat mass than lean mass, they just lost a lot of lean mass. 'Cause why? They probably had a lot to lose. That's really what it came down to. And then in 2022, we had the Sirmat-1 trial. This is on Terzepatide, right? So Terzepatide seems to be even stronger than semiglutide in terms of weight loss. It's a dual peptide, so it's a GLP-1 and GIP peptide kind of medication. And that really, really works. They have dramatic weight loss reduction. We're talking like 21% with the highest dose. So we're talking 20% of your total weight loss, that's a huge thing. And recently there was a 2024 analysis looking at this. It was a DEXA sub-study of Sirmat, and looked at body composition in detail with Terzepatide. And they found significant reductions in body weight, total fat mass, and visceral fat mass compared to placebo. And remarkably, the proportion of weight loss was similar in the Terzepatide and placebo groups, around 74 to 75% fat mass and 25 to 26% lean mass. So these are kind of contrary to what we saw previously with the semiglutide saying, "Hey, you lose right at that 25% rule. That seems reasonable. That's what we're gonna do." And it kind of suggests that maybe some of these ones, your Terzepatide versus semiglutide, they might actually have a protective effect on lean mass, meaning, "Hey, we did even better." But these proportions were consistent across different age groups, sexes, and level weight reduction, which is important, yeah. And that's, yeah, it's significant. We'll see significant weight loss, and then we also are gonna see muscle mass as well. But we do see that weight loss. We see muscle mass, but current evidence, including these studies, suggests that muscle changes with these medications are adaptive, meaning that the changes in muscle can be aligned with expectations based on age, underlying disease, and total weight loss. And yeah, they actually may improve the muscle quality by improving insulin sensitivity is another thing I've read as well, which is interesting. But overall, if you look at the totality of the data, it does not seem like you're just melting muscle away. That seems to be the thing on social media, right? It's like, "Oh my gosh, don't take these medications. They're gonna melt muscle away." Well, I think we have to think about a couple of things. You will lose some lean tissue. That's going to happen. But we can try to prevent that by having a higher protein diet and doing resistance training and all that stuff. But overall, it seems like you're at a relatively similar pace to where you were with diet and exercise. And so people will tell you, "Hey, diet and exercise, diet and exercise, do that." And you lose 25% of your weight is fat-free mass. And then that's a good thing, right? But all of a sudden you do that through medication. So that's bad, that's bad. You gotta pick what you want, right? Do you want people to have the benefits of weight reduction and all that comes with it? Or do you think it's only good if they do it through a natural way? I don't know. It's one of those things where you just gotta step back and be like, "What's the end goal?" If we are at excess adiposity, leading to metabolic diseases and metabolic syndrome, then losing weight with a little bit of muscle, I will probably take that if that improves all the other cardiometabolic markers. That's just something to think about there. But overall, it doesn't seem like it's way, way, way worse like most people are blowing out of proportion, but that gets clicks. But yeah, it doesn't seem to be the case at all. And then moving on with bariatric surgery, I just wanna touch base here 'cause this is a big one. Bariatric surgery, shocker, also works really, really well in terms of leads to significant and rapid weight loss with substantial changes in body composition. One meta-analysis I looked at, found that people lost over eight kilograms of lean mass within the first year of surgery. That's lean mass, just lean mass, not total body mass, but eight kilograms of lean mass. But this lean mass loss was pretty consistent across different types of bariatric surgery, whether it's gastric bypass, sleeve gastrectomy, banding, diversion, all those one. But about 55% of that lean body mass loss happens in the first three months after surgery, higher than the importance of early interventions to preserve lean mass. Another study looked at, compared patients who lost more than 50% of the excess weight to those who lost less. And the group with the higher excess weight loss had a better ratio fat mass to lean muscle loss in comparison to the other group. And this higher weight loss group also had an increase in their mean skeletal muscle index percentage. So once again, a big chunk of both lean tissue and fat was being lost, but it overall improved the ratio of the person, which I thought was pretty interesting. And yeah, you see lots of these rapid changes, right? Why is it happening? Well, one idea might be, well, you're not doing much after surgery, right? You're just kind of hanging around and so you're not using your muscles. So could that be leading to that loss of muscle? Who knows? Not sure. But they also have to think about something when you lose this much weight. If you think about something called a sarcopenic obesity, where you lose lots of muscle, but you still have obesity, and that actually can be an issue. That's the big thing everyone's talking about here. We do not want to get that. We don't want to get in that spot where we still have excess adiposity, but we've also lost muscle, so that's like bad. It's a double bad whammy. Too much fat, not enough muscle, bad, bad, bad. But overall, we saw these big studies losing a lot, and overall, it didn't seem to be much different in proportion. They lost a lot. They lost a lot, but it seemed to be a pretty good ratio as well in for bariatric surgery. And then the big take home points here are all weight loss methods will leave you with at least some loss of lean tissue. It's gonna happen. You're gonna absolutely do that. However, different interventions will have different effects on fat mass and lean mass, and traditional lifestyle interventions lead to fat loss, especially with resistance training, and improve the lean mass to fat mass ratios. But often, the same lean mass loss that we see in exercise is similar to what we see in GOP ones. And so that's the big thing. You can have big weight loss with these medications, and bariatric surgery, but overall, it seems to be relatively similar to what we see in traditional means of weight loss. And bariatric surgery is a big, big one. We're gonna lose a lot in one skin, also similar. But on top of this, another big take home I just wanna see is you have to really individualize this to the patient, right? So when someone is seeing you in the clinic, which they see me as a physician, and they may not see you, but if someone's gonna talk to you about this, it's because of a couple of reasons, right? One, it could be just, hey, I don't enjoy the way my clothes fit. I don't feel confident. That's one reason people won't want to. Another reason is people, hey, I'm at risk for these certain things. I have diabetes now. My family has a history of heart disease. I'm worried about this. And so people are coming to you for a reason for weight loss. We have to determine is the risk, is the risk of losing some of that lean body mass, is that worth it? That's really the discussion. The discussion is never for someone who is very much healthy and in a regular weight and just says, hey, I wanna lose a couple pounds. This is an argument that I will never, I won't have this discussion with patients. There's like, oh, it's gonna lose a little bit. I will do this when I think it improves their metabolic profile or helps reduce their risk, takes them from a high risk to a lower risk. That's the reason we use this. It's never just for a little bit of weight loss cosmetically there, but you really have to individualize this, right? So figure out, you have to talk and say, hey, is this worth it? Is this going to improve your metabolic health? Is this gonna help you long-term? That's what we're going for. And yeah, it's just kind of what we're at here. And I really wanted to just do this because I've seen so many things about weight loss drugs and they're so bad, they're so bad. You need to do it the old fashioned way. And what I choose for you to do it the old fashioned way, 100%, 100%. You know why? Because there's gonna be way less side effects if you do it that way, in terms of other things that are happening. We know that these medications have side effects. Surgeries have side effects and have risks. And if I can take away a risk, but still get the improvement in losing weight, then I would choose it every time. The problem is we just see in the data, it just doesn't work time and time and time again. Long-term, it's very hard. For every person, every 10, 20 people I counsel, maybe one person will stick on that. And that's being generous and you don't have to talk about 10% and it just doesn't seem to be the numbers. Do I want that to happen? Yes, I do, but it's just not. So I want to step back to make sure that I wasn't doing harm to patients by prescribing these medications, right? I think overall, I feel consistent that, hey, if we're smart about this, if we're exercising, doing resistance training, while we're on these medications, then the fat mass loss to lean mass loss should be similar to other means of weight loss. And that's the really big take home that I found from this is that, hey, we can still do this. And once again, sometimes people just need help, right? Some people are harder, have a harder time losing weight. And that's the thing. I want to have as many tools in my toolbox as humanly possible. And so, yeah, some people might say, oh, you're a shill for big pharma. No, like first things first, I'm always gonna do lifestyle. But the question is, if someone's not having success with lifestyle, what are you gonna tell them? Try harder? Like, sorry, like that's it, gigs up? Or can you say, hey, we have an option to help you lose some weight and probably improve your cardiometabolic health, all those things. To me, that's just crazy if we don't do that. It's the same thing if you had high blood pressure. You wouldn't be like, hey man, try harder, like try harder. Have you tried harder not to have high blood pressure? It's like, no, we're gonna help you along the way. We're always gonna be working on lifestyle factors along the way as well. Yeah, so I guess that's obviously something that works me up a little bit, just because I want to help as many people as possible. And I want people to be healthy. And however we need to do that, let's do it. That's kind of my idea behind it. We're always gonna start on a pyramid. I was thinking pyramid of treatment, the big base. What's the base of your pyramid? It's gonna be lifestyle changes. Then we move up, we can talk about medications. And then surgery is kind of our last resort potentially. And that's kind of what I think about most interventions. But overall, really important topic, just wanted to mention it. Thanks for stopping by, I really appreciate it. If you did like this though, it would mean the world to me. If you liked the video on YouTube, subscribe on your podcast platform or choice, or if you share it with a friend. Sharing with a friend is like the highest compliment. I really appreciate it. But thanks so much for stopping by. Now get off your phone, get outside, have a great rest of the day, and we'll see you next time.
