 Next question is from body by HK. What do you think of trainers using unstable surfaces to train compound movements? For example, barbell back squat or on wobble pillows or a bozu ball? So when these unstable surfaces, I remember specifically, because I've been in fitness long enough to remember these being introduced into fitness. So when I first started working as a trainer, you didn't see any of this stuff at all. You didn't even see a physical ball. It didn't exist. This exploded after certain certifications were promoting it. All of a sudden they came into the scene and they didn't just come into the scene, they took over. Then it was like every exercise on an unstable surface because it makes every exercise more effective. So they went too far in the other direction. Now I think we're a little bit more balanced. Do unstable surfaces provide value? They do. There's some value for sure. They could teach you, they slow your form down. They could teach you to activate your core and your posture. It's of course a different type of movement, so recruits muscles differently. It does improve balance specifically when you're standing on unstable surfaces because it's pretty specific. So I see value, but the value is specific. In other words, it doesn't replace the value of doing heavy both feet on the flat floor. This is the very bottom of the pyramid. This is what you build upon. If there's issues with stability, then there's massive value in introducing unstable surfaces in order to regain that and feel how you need to recruit to be able to stabilize properly. For the most part, I would use this with clients with body weight. If I'm really trying to specifically address an issue, that's where I find a lot of value in that. Adding load to it, you're going to have to make a good argument for me to really accept that that's something that's of value for the person. I also want to caution you to falling into this trap. I feel like this is really common in the trainer space. We read a few books. We get some national certifications. We become fresh out of college, so we have some knowledge. Then we see things and we like to pick it apart and critique what Jane is doing over there with her trainer, like, oh my God, scoff at it, I can't believe they're training on that. That's so stupid and that makes no sense. Here's the thing, you don't know what that person is training for specifically. There is an application for almost any weird kind of thing that we've seen before. I've learned now to not judge when I see stuff like that because I'm not in the trainer's head. I don't know what their desired outcome of that is. I think Sal nailed it that it's very specific, but you don't know that person could be what that specific thing is for. That might be related to what they're trying to accomplish. I've done enough weird things for clients that I'm sure somebody looked at me and judged, but they have no idea what I'm trying to do. Phil Darryu made that comment when we were just interviewing him recently when he gets people that are all these coaches and they're critiquing. It's like, you don't know my athlete. You don't know them the way I know them. I've seen them move and I've seen them compete for the last three years and there's very little specific things I'm trying to give them. Maybe this thing translates into that even though for general population and muscle building and strength, this looks ridiculous. It looks stupid. It doesn't make sense, but because I have a very specific goal in mind that I desired outcome with this person, I do want to train that. So just be careful if you're a coach and a trainer and you're asking questions like this or you're judging other trainers that are doing that because you don't know these things, don't fall in that trap of assuming that you do. I had a surfer and a skateboarder and I would train them. And so this was one of those things they were trying to improve the way that they react and stabilize and balance quickly. So there was some weird elements involved with that too. So to your point, and specificity was definitely the reason for that. So yeah, there are instances out there for sure. My favorite tool of all the unstable tools is just the physio ball. Physio ball is the most useful in my opinion, generally speaking. And there is a lot of value in using the physio ball for certain people. Our MAP starter program uses quite a bit of the physio ball and this is how you want to start working out. It teaches you proper form, gets you to activate properly, stabilize properly and then progressing from there to more traditional lifts. It's a great transition. I mean, I would take it a step further and even say unilateral training. I mean, that's great stability. If you're doing one arm, one leg, anything, the stability that you get just from doing unilateral training is phenomenal. So you don't even necessarily need to take it to having tools. Like to me, that's even more, regressing it even further back is just getting to the place where you can use every limb independently by itself and stabilize the major joints. That right there in itself is a great place. But again, we don't know what the trainer is, what their desired outcome, what their potential sport is or goal of the client. So be careful.