 Next question is from Chai Latte. How can I tell if I lack mobility or if it's just my anatomical limitations? Nine out of 10 times, it's a mobility issue. So nine out of 10 times you lack the strength, the control and the stability. One out of 10 times there's something wrong with your bones or your joints that's causing the issue, anatomically speaking, not like you had an injury in your joint, but rather the joint is constructed in a way to where it's a limiting factor. And how do you know the difference? Well, it's like, imagine going into a deep squat and you feel literally a block. Bones, boom, that's it. Like almost like extending my elbow, I can't extend my elbow any further. That's not a mobility issue. My joint just won't extend any further. So that's what that feels like. Now going to the bottom of a squat and feeling tight, oh, my hip flexor or, ooh, I can't go any further because my heels rise or I feel, that's usually mobility. And again, I say nine out of 10 times because ever since you see this now in social media posts where you see these anatomy experts will post a picture of a hip joint and we'll show, see this person can't squat this deep or they need to have a wider stance because of the way that the femur fits in the, so now you have all these people who have poor mobility who now have a wonderful excuse and they're like, oh, this is why I don't lift that way. It's because my bones and I can't change my bones. Now, nine out of 10 times you just don't have the strength to build your hip flexor. Well, then you add in and to defend the guys and girls that slam all the mobility people is now, okay, people are aware that there's this mobility thing that a lot of people may or may not be, should be doing and now everybody's jumping on the bandwagon of trying to sell people this idea. I think a really cool way to test this is actually the discrepancy from left to right. So an easy way to tell it has nothing to do with your morphology, right? So your structure and to see if there's a mobility issue is the discrepancy from left to right. If you do your hips in a 90-90, for example, and the left to right looks exactly the same as far as internal and external rotation, it might be, that might be your range of motion for your hips. Now, everybody can probably have, extend their capacity a little bit, give or take. Also look at passive mobility, right? Someone could lift your leg and show you, oh no, it moves that way, you just can't do it yourself. Right, right. So looking at left to right, and rarely ever have I ever seen this in my own body or any clients, do they always match completely? And so if you see that this shoulder has no problem getting here, but then when I go to do this one, that's all I got, there's definitely a mobility issue there. Because you definitely don't have a discrepancy in your morphology from left to right like that. It's hard to argue, oh, your feet externally rotate because that's the way your pelvis is and how am I gonna debate that? But if I get you down in a 90-90 and I go to show that your left heel, you can lift up off the ground six inches and then the other one, you can't even budge. That's very obvious to me as a coach, there's a mobility issue in that hip. And we probably can improve both and there's a good chance there's an issue on both, but that's one of the best ways to be sure of that. Yeah, I have somewhat of a challenge to that mentality in terms of like, I see a lot of coaches out there that put like, if you have this kind of set up with your femur and your hips and you should probably go into this stance and so immediately sort of eliminating just the movement in general, whereas I would be more comfortable with having multiple stances where we can see where those ranges lie and then try to get subtle improvements on each one of them and not just eliminate them unless it's really causing you some kind of like, dysfunction where you can have chronic pain from it or like some kind of like injury is as a result because it's such a bad angle. But in my experience, I haven't found that to be the case. Yeah, okay, so here's the problem. The problem is that we consider things like squats, overhead presses, rows, horizontal presses. We don't consider them foundational human movements. So oftentimes people will say that their lack of mobility is an anatomical issue. But if I change the words, but not the conversation, I think this starts to make a little bit more sense. So let's say somebody was walking funny. You see someone walking funny down the street. Most doctors, most movement specialists, most trainers, most fitness people would say there's a muscle issue going on there. There's a mobility issue going on there. There's the firing pattern is wrong. Most people wouldn't say there's an anatomical problem. Now are there anatomical issues that can cause people to walk in ways that are dysfunctional? Yes, are they common? No, they're rare, far more common. If somebody's walking wrong, just to use a word that, you know, just off the top of my head, if they're walking in a dysfunctional way, it's because the recruitment patterns aren't ideal or they have mobility issues that are not working for them. Same thing applies to squatting. Squatting is a fundamental human movement. Pushing your arms overhead, fundamental human movement. Rowing, fundamental human movement. So if you can't do those things with a good comfortable full range of motion, chances are very high. It has nothing to do with your bones or things that you can't work on as probably has everything to do with the fact that you lack the strength, the stability, the flexibility, the mobility. These are all things that you can work on. So again, nine out of 10 times I'll stand by that. It's not anatomy.