 Next question is from Amber Soleno. When reverse dieting should macros or calories be the priority? Yeah, so this is an interesting one because macronutrients have calories, so macros, proteins, fats, and carbohydrates. The key with reverse dieting is to slowly increase your calories over time, try to build some muscle, try to speed up the metabolism through that process. So typically you want to do resistance training as part of this, bump your calories slowly, your metabolism actually will speed up so you can eat more. Now, are macros an important part of that course because you still want to hit your protein, especially protein and fat requirements, and high protein is going to help this process. So it's hard to say which one is more important. I feel it's a very simple answer. The answer is macros. The reason why it's macros is if you hit your macros, you hit your calories. If you hit your calories, you don't necessarily hit your macros. So to me it's a very simple answer. If you figure out using some sort of a macro calculator or doing it longhand, this is what I need to be eating proteins, fat, and carbs, those are your macros, and you stick to those, you'll hit what you're supposed to hit calorie-wise. You'll be either, if you're reverse dieting, you'll be etching you up slowly like you're supposed to. If you're dieting and cutting, you'll be hitting under the calories like you're supposed to. If you just follow calories and say, oh, I'm trying to reverse diet and I was at 1,700 calories, now I want to be at 1,900, but those 1,900 calories all come from carbs and not enough protein or too much fat, not enough protein, then it's not working. So if you just follow the macros, then it's inevitable the calories will line up. Isn't the term reverse dieting, isn't it just redundant? Because you're just for an oxymoron. It's more of an oxymoron than a focusing on eating. That's your focus instead of dieting. What's the opposite of dieting? Well, I think the reason why it's coined as a diet is because you are following some sort of a structure. It's not intuitive. You are strategically adding calories slash macros to your diet. You're scaling it up because you're trying to increase the amount of calories. So I think that's why it gets termed as a diet because you're not necessarily reducing your adding to your point. And it is a strategy. I'm just kind of talking shit, but it's something I think a lot of people like me would be confused with this, just throwing that term out there if you're not in the bodybuilding world specifically. So this is more like a lot of competitors will get to that point where they get down. So their metabolism is so low. That's a great point. So we can take this down to the audience who's not into the bodybuilding world or understands that, but what you need to understand that when you, even if you're not competing, you're just dieting, right? Trying to lose weight. You're eating a calorie restricted diet for an extended period of time. The body eventually adapts to that new calorie intake. So if you're somebody who was, say, eating 2,500 or 3,000 calories, you went on a diet that restricts you down to 15 or 1,800 calories. And you've been on that for six, eight, 12 weeks to get to your goal. And you get to your goal. What you don't want to do is go back to your 25 or 2,800 in calories because the body's now dead. So you need to reverse diet, meaning you need to slowly introduce calories over the course of the next two, four, six, eight, 12 weeks, depending on how long it takes you to get up to whatever calorie intake you want to be up to. And this, what this will do is naturally allow the body to slowly adapt to the new core can take without throwing a ton of extra calories on it and then adding body fat. So that's the idea or concept behind it.