GLP-1s and Muscle Loss: What the Evidence Actually Shows

[Cannonball72]

How Much Muscle Are GLP-1 Patients Actually Losing?

Two systematic reviews. One question. Different answers.

substance-over-noise.beehiiv.com

GLP-1s and Muscle Loss: What the Evidence Actually Shows

Two 2026 systematic reviews appear to conflict: one found absolute lean mass losses of only 1–4%, while the other found 68% of GLP-1 interventions exceeded the benchmark of losing more than 25% of total weight as muscle. They’re answering different questions — one tracks absolute LBM change from baseline, the other tracks lean mass as a proportion of total weight lost.  Crucially, the comparator data undercuts the alarm: among lifestyle/placebo arms, 50% of interventions also exceeded the muscle-loss benchmark at a median weight loss of just ~2.4%. 

The ratio isn’t unique to GLP-1s — the drugs just produce more weight loss.
The “lean mass loss” signal itself is likely overstated due to DXA’s limitations. DXA cannot distinguish skeletal muscle from liver mass, intramuscular fat, glycogen, or extracellular fluid — and Langer et al. found liver mass decreased 20–55% across incretin agents in preclinical models, tracking tightly with body weight while muscle mass barely did.  When function is actually measured, semaglutide reduced muscle cross-sectional area on ultrasound yet grip strength and knee extension were unchanged; STEP 9 showed improved physical function scores despite lean mass changes.  Mass and function are dissociable — and often moving in opposite directions.

The practical answer is clear. The Lundgren NEJM RCT showed that exercise plus liraglutide preserved lean mass and produced 15.7% total weight loss — roughly double the fat reduction of either intervention alone — while neutralizing liraglutide’s resting heart rate increase. A small case series with structured resistance training on semaglutide/tirzepatide showed two of three patients actually gaining lean tissue during major weight loss. The protocol: resistance training 2–3x/week, protein at 1.2–1.6 g/kg adjusted body weight, and functional monitoring (grip strength, gait speed) — built in from the start.

 

[5byfive]

Thanks ChatGPT.

 

[Rezwalker]

Thanks ChatGPT.

The Machines have won

 

[Estarossa19]

I think I've read numerous times it's pretty much about the same as someone not taking the GLP's. Pairing any sort of weight loss program with resistance training will be the only method of preserving muscle long term.

 

[kj4otu]

The "glp's kill muscle mass" thing is bull. ALL weight loss kills muscle mass...IF you just starve yourself and don't do anything else, which GLPs make easy to do. The protocol (The protocol: resistance training 2–3x/week, protein at 1.2–1.6 g/kg adjusted body weight, and functional monitoring (grip strength, gait speed)) has to be a standard no matter how you lose if you wnt to keep muscle.

 

[5byfive]

Sorry OP,.but the more I think about it, the more this post really pisses me.off. I made a joke about it, but one of the reasons I'm here instead of Reddit is becuse every other post there is lazy AI slop like this. If we start accepting this kind of thing it will be everywhere and drag the whole forum down. There should be a rule prohibiting this kind of thing.

 

[Cannonball72]

The Machines have won

Yes, i absolutely used AI to summarize (Claude). It’s way better at summary than I am. But the key points are there.

GLPs do not contribute to muscle loss any more than other weight loss, and dexa doesn’t tell the full story either, because it can’t differentiate between liver fat and muscle or muscle/muscle glycogen.

people actually gain muscle mass on GLPs provide they are on point with exercise and nutrition.

I really don’t get the issue with using AI for a summary.

 

[Cannonball72]

Sorry OP,.but the more I think about it, the more this post really pisses me.off. I made a joke about it, but one of the reasons I'm here instead of Reddit is becuse every other post there is lazy AI slop like this. If we start accepting this kind of thing it will be everywhere and drag the whole forum down. There should be a rule prohibiting this kind of thing.

Apologies for not hitting your standard. I don’t really care. The info is what matters.

 

[Calm Logic]

I'll take human-reviewed AI over bro science any day. For example, I don't even know why some people in this forum even take GLPs when they are supposedly losing so much fat with HGH or tesa.

 

[UnusualLLama]

Yes, i absolutely used AI to summarize (Claude). It’s way better at summary than I am. But the key points are there.

GLPs do not contribute to muscle loss any more than other weight loss, and dexa doesn’t tell the full story either, because it can’t differentiate between liver fat and muscle or muscle/muscle glycogen.

people actually gain muscle mass on GLPs provide they are on point with exercise and nutrition.

I really don’t get the issue with using AI for a summary.

Yeah I think this is the main thing to note, a lot of the "Lean mass reductions when doing x, y and z" are taking into account ALL lean mass, and people equate that to muscle, which isn't accurate.

 

[5byfive]

Apologies for not hitting your standard. I don’t really care. The info is what matters.

I'm not going to apologize for having some, honestly pretty low, standards. I really try to be very easy going.on here but also I tend to be very defensive of the community. This is a discussion that is had here pretty much every day on here and an AI slop post adds nothing to it. I'm sure intentions were good, but this is the type of thing that is literally killing the internet. If we don't push back we end up with an internet, and a community, that is just bots talking to each other. I have used AI for a lot of things, including on here, I'm not anti-AI, but I stand by it being inappropriate to use it write posts on here.

 

[Cannonball72]

I'm not going to apologize for having some, honestly pretty low, standards. I really try to be very easy going.on here but also I tend to be very defensive of the community. This is a discussion that is had here pretty much every day on here and an AI slop post adds nothing to it. I'm sure intentions were good, but this is the type of thing that is literally killing the internet. If we don't push back we end up with an internet, and a community, that is just bots talking to each other. I have used AI for a lot of things, including on here, I'm not anti-AI, but I stand by it being inappropriate to use it write posts on here.

I’m not asking you to apologize, but no one appointed you as chief human content creation manager either.

Your view of appropriate vs inappropriate is yours. You don’t speak for everyone.

The value of the article is substantial. A summary is a useful way to get key points.

 

[ThunderBird]

Yes, i absolutely used AI to summarize (Claude). It’s way better at summary than I am. But the key points are there.

GLPs do not contribute to muscle loss any more than other weight loss, and dexa doesn’t tell the full story either, because it can’t differentiate between liver fat and muscle or muscle/muscle glycogen.

people actually gain muscle mass on GLPs provide they are on point with exercise and nutrition.

I really don’t get the issue with using AI for a summary.

You are not "gaining" any mass on a GLP even with a super dialed in diet and training unless you are on gear or are completely new to exercising lol. You lost weight and are living a healthy no crap you gained muscle but its not at all because you are on a GLP.

 

[Cannonball72]

You are not "gaining" any mass on a GLP even with a super dialed in diet and training unless you are on gear or are completely new to exercising lol. You lost weight and are living a healthy no crap you gained muscle but its not at all because you are on a GLP.

The analysis suggests that, contrary to conventional wisdom, you can actually gain muscle mass while losing weight on GLPs. The key is having a dialed nutrition and a strength program, from the start.

It’s a small sampling yes, but it is also relevant to the broader discussion and deserves a broader investigation.

“A small case series with structured resistance training on semaglutide/tirzepatide showed two of three patients actually gaining lean tissue during major weight loss. The protocol: resistance training 2–3x/week, protein at 1.2–1.6 g/kg adjusted body weight, and functional monitoring (grip strength, gait speed) — built in from the start.”

Personally, I have been stagnant with weights since I started Reta, but I have also been in significant deficit and lost 25lbs since end of Jan. I see the upside here in that I am not losing strength, which should be the case if I were losing muscle at the rates suggested in prior research (65-75% fat / 25-35% muscle).

 

[CharlieBrown]

You are not "gaining" any mass on a GLP even with a super dialed in diet and training unless you are on gear or are completely new to exercising lol. You lost weight and are living a healthy no crap you gained muscle but its not at all because you are on a GLP.

Nailed it !!
I lost 25lbs of body fat and gained A LOT of lean muscle tissue in 4 months.
Started Reta in January. Currently at 10mg every 6th day.
That's my profile pic. I made my decision and I'm happy with it.
75mg test + 25mg NPP every 3rd day. My Dr. gave me a script for meds to avoid blood thickening. And I have a PCT already.
You can't expect this too happen naturally at 65.

 

[CharmanderInDisguise]

Personally, I'm only on reta now (3mg/wk). 39M. I was stacking tirz and reta. No other peptides. High protein diet, lots of exercise, and really close attention to calories. I lost fat and gained a little muscle. Anecdotally, body recomp is definitely possible on strictly GLPs. InBody scans three months apart is where my numbers are coming from.

 

[staffn1]

Gaining muscle is hard. Maybe easier for the untrained people who are the typical overweight person on glp's but still. I do not know how many times I see on Facebook someone posted that their weight loss stalled or even gained weight for the week and some dope comes along and said maybe you gained muscle? Sure, the person is eating protein and doing a little bit of walking around the neighborhood, claims to be in a "calorie deficit" and the reason they didn't lose weight is because they gained a ton of muscle? Lol

 

[woundcarping]

Gaining muscle is hard. Maybe easier for the untrained people who are the typical overweight person on glp's but still. I do not know how many times I see on Facebook someone posted that their weight loss stalled or even gained weight for the week and some dope comes along and said maybe you gained muscle? Sure, the person is eating protein and doing a little bit of walking around the neighborhood, claims to be in a "calorie deficit" and the reason they didn't lose weight is because they gained a ton of muscle? Lol

It's hard and unlikely to add a meaningful amount of muscle fiber while aggressively cutting weight, it's much more practical to add fiber while bulking.

With the assumption that the average person that came here was looking to lose considerable weight, the more practical goal seems to be preservation of lean mass/muscle fiber rather than trying to actually build muscle.


I've thought about making a thread about my data along the way, but let's put some of it in the post.

In the first 4-6 weeks of starting a GLP you'll shed the easy "water weight", the glycogen depletion and water, inflammation reduction, sodium/water normalizing, blood plasma volume normalizing.

Due to scheduling dumbness, I didn't get my starting weight Dexa near 12/12/25, my first Dexa was 7 weeks in to my GLP journey... there's some hinkiness with the data, which I'll bring up on my scan later this month and see if I can improve my confidence in the accuracy of the numbers below.

Dexa Data:

Metric	01/30/2026	03/25/2026	04/30/2026	Total Change (1→3)
Total Weight	257.45 lb	238.77 lb	228.49 lb	-28.96 lb
Fat Mass	103.52 lb	77.26 lb	68.48 lb	-35.04 lb
Lean+BMC	162.61 lb (corrected)	161.50 lb	160.01 lb	-2.60 lb
Body Fat %	40.2%	32.4%	30.0%	-10.2 points

So from 1/30 to 4/30, using Dexa data I lost 92% fat and 8% lean mass, with some margin of error.

Hydration is the biggest user controlled variable for body comp scans, I try to hydrate the same every time (and fasted) to reduce that particular variable. I started creatine after the 3rd scan so I'd have a baseline to compare the creatine increase in lean mass.

AI is pretty content that my actual muscle fiber atrophy is fairly low, in the range of ~1lb, with a "large" band of uncertainty (+/- ~1lb) because of scan repeatability, hydration changes, and other variables.

 

[Cannonball72]

It's hard and unlikely to add a meaningful amount of muscle fiber while aggressively cutting weight, it's much more practical to add fiber while bulking.

With the assumption that the average person that came here was looking to lose considerable weight, the more practical goal seems to be preservation of lean mass/muscle fiber rather than trying to actually build muscle.


I've thought about making a thread about my data along the way, but let's put some of it in the post.

In the first 4-6 weeks of starting a GLP you'll shed the easy "water weight", the glycogen depletion and water, inflammation reduction, sodium/water normalizing, blood plasma volume normalizing.

Due to scheduling dumbness, I didn't get my starting weight Dexa near 12/12/25, my first Dexa was 7 weeks in to my GLP journey... there's some hinkiness with the data, which I'll bring up on my scan later this month and see if I can improve my confidence in the accuracy of the numbers below.

Dexa Data:

Metric	01/30/2026	03/25/2026	04/30/2026	Total Change (1→3)
Total Weight	257.45 lb	238.77 lb	228.49 lb	-28.96 lb
Fat Mass	103.52 lb	77.26 lb	68.48 lb	-35.04 lb
Lean+BMC	162.61 lb (corrected)	161.50 lb	160.01 lb	-2.60 lb
Body Fat %	40.2%	32.4%	30.0%	-10.2 points

So from 1/30 to 4/30, using Dexa data I lost 92% fat and 8% lean mass, with some margin of error.

Hydration is the biggest user controlled variable for body comp scans, I try to hydrate the same every time (and fasted) to reduce that particular variable. I started creatine after the 3rd scan so I'd have a baseline to compare the creatine increase in lean mass.

AI is pretty content that my actual muscle fiber atrophy is fairly low, in the range of ~1lb, with a "large" band of uncertainty (+/- ~1lb) because of scan repeatability, hydration changes, and other variables.

Awesome progress and numbers!

I think your point is key, and it raises an important question: what is actually being measured?

DEXA scans measure muscle, fat, and bone — and that’s what most studies rely on. But DEXA can’t distinguish between fully hydrated muscles (loaded with water and glycogen) and depleted muscles. It sees both as the same lean mass. So you are required to control for consistency each time you measure (as you pointed out)

Everyone knows you can’t gain 10 lbs of true muscle in a weekend. Yet anyone who’s done keto and then eaten carbs for a few days has likely seen significant weight gain as a result. Pre-carbs = depleted muscle. Post-carbs = full muscle. DEXA would register that as a 10 lb muscle gain — but it’s clearly not new muscle fiber.

This same limitation applies to GLP analysis. When studies postulate fat and muscle loss on GLPs, a lot of nuance gets lost and compressed into a handful of broad categories.

For me, this reinforces the need for healthy skepticism — and a more practical framework: if weight loss is not accompanied by strength loss, there’s a good chance muscle fiber is being maintained. Under the right conditions, small increases are even possible with a well-designed program.

Bottom line: We should worry a lot less about muscle loss on GLPs, as long as strength stays consistent.

 

[ThunderBird]

Nailed it !!
I lost 25lbs of body fat and gained A LOT of lean muscle tissue in 4 months.
Started Reta in January. Currently at 10mg every 6th day.
That's my profile pic. I made my decision and I'm happy with it.
75mg test + 25mg NPP every 3rd day. My Dr. gave me a script for meds to avoid blood thickening. And I have a PCT already.
You can't expect this too happen naturally at 65.

That's awesome man you are looking great! Also if your looking for a way to get rid of some red blood cells you can always donate some blood I'm sure red cross or whoever does it in your area would appreciate it. Honestly I'm surprised you are planning on going on a PCT and not just gonna coast on HRT being that you are 65, hoping that I look like that at 65. Honestly I was planning on just blasting as soon as I hit my mid 50s or whenever my test drops off a cliff lol but that's pretty far off for me haha

 

[desinr-gal]

I think the answer is obvious. Muscles build in response to use, resistance and need. Strength training i.e. lifting weights builds muscles, atrophy occurs when lower/no resistance occurs.
Having loss over 50 lbs, I lost a Lot of muscle, because I have Not been lifting and carrying around those 50 lbs all day everyday. I started out working on lifting, but got sidetracked and then lazy.. Now I am much lighter and much weaker. and that makes perfect sense.
I can't even imagine what it would be like spending everyday navigating life with a 52lb weight on my back, and yet that was the life I was leading. I am much happier without it!

 

[woundcarping]

Awesome progress and numbers!

Thanks!

I think your point is key, and it raises an important question: what is actually being measured?

I didn't mean to make a particular point. The hinkiness in my data is with a couple numbers changing from the day of report (1/30) vs the comparison report made on 4/30. I corrected the data to the most logically rational results, but I'd like to harass them a bit since I've paid $600 for the data so far.

DEXA measures fat, bone mineral content (BMC), and "everything else" (lean mass). That "everything else" is volatile, primarily to fluid shifts but also food weight. For example, drinking a .5L bottle of water before scanning will make your lean mass increase ~1lb. Stomach contents (food) will show up as lean mass as well. Lean mass≠muscle fiber. Some advanced DEXAs can give a value for dry lean mass, or lean mass minus water mass.

...Pre-carbs = depleted muscle. Post-carbs = full muscle. DEXA would register that as a 10 lb muscle gain — but it’s clearly not new muscle fiber.

Probably hyperbole, but 10lb of weight gain from carbs would take 1000-1500g or 4000-6000 calories of carbs to accomplish. DEXA would show that as +10lb of lean mass, it does not show muscle fiber explicitly.

...Under the right conditions, small increases are even possible with a well-designed program...

I posit that for the average person cutting significant weight, the effort spent gaining that theoretically possible very small increase of muscle fiber would be better spent preserving their lean mass, cutting weight, and enjoying life. Once the weight is cut it is far easier and more practical to have meaningful fiber gains while at maintenance or preferably a surplus of calories.

I think quality of life and 2 year recomposition outlook significantly favors separating the cutting/maintaining from a protracted conservative cut + an effort to gain. I admit I have not specifically researched the time efficiency aspect.

Bottom line: We should worry a lot less about muscle loss on GLPs, as long as strength stays consistent.

Speed of weight loss, resistance training, and protein intake matters. Turning a blind eye to any of that is a great way to be disappointed with the outcome. I wanted scans as my typical weights I'm lifting aren't in the gym and noticing at work that I'm weaker would be harder to adjust for. Noticeable strength loss would be a lagging indicator for me beyond what I find acceptable.


Between my second and third scans I didn't go to the gym, didn't track macros, etc... mostly because I was being lazy, partly because I wanted to see what would happen between scans (which is why I took the third scan a month before I originally planned). It's no surprise I lost a higher percentage of lean mass during that period... but the loss was acceptable to me and significantly better than the Quarter Rule.



Loss speed and supplements can help with catabolism and be lean sparing, which I think my data illustrates.

I specifically target 1-1.1% weight loss per week... slower is more conservative than I want, while faster is more likely to be detrimental to my lean mass without additional efforts. If I'm losing 92/8 fat to lean, that implies I've been running a ~1260 calorie daily deficit for 21 weeks and counting.


I take consistently (doses have changed) took/take:
4mg HMB-FA daily (split 2x or 3x)
180mg Test C weekly (split 3x)
16mg Reta weekly (split 2x)

Since the 3rd scan I have added creatine. I'm loading at around 20g/day for ~10 days and will transition to 10g/day for the duration.


Holy moly this turned into a half/half length post!

 

[CharlieBrown]

Awesome progress and numbers!

I think your point is key, and it raises an important question: what is actually being measured?

DEXA scans measure muscle, fat, and bone — and that’s what most studies rely on. But DEXA can’t distinguish between fully hydrated muscles (loaded with water and glycogen) and depleted muscles. It sees both as the same lean mass. So you are required to control for consistency each time you measure (as you pointed out)

Everyone knows you can’t gain 10 lbs of true muscle in a weekend. Yet anyone who’s done keto and then eaten carbs for a few days has likely seen significant weight gain as a result. Pre-carbs = depleted muscle. Post-carbs = full muscle. DEXA would register that as a 10 lb muscle gain — but it’s clearly not new muscle fiber.

This same limitation applies to GLP analysis. When studies postulate fat and muscle loss on GLPs, a lot of nuance gets lost and compressed into a handful of broad categories.

For me, this reinforces the need for healthy skepticism — and a more practical framework: if weight loss is not accompanied by strength loss, there’s a good chance muscle fiber is being maintained. Under the right conditions, small increases are even possible with a well-designed program.

Bottom line: We should worry a lot less about muscle loss on GLPs, as long as strength stays consistent.

I'm sorry, but I have to disagree a little bit. Especially because some people will loose a lot of weight and be happy without realizing they lost a lot of muscle mass in the process.

Muscle Mass: Maintaining a healthy level of muscle mass is crucial for your overall health, healthspan, and quality of life. From metabolic benefits to injury prevention to support for cognitive function, muscle plays a fundamental role in all of these important areas.
One of the primary reasons muscle mass matters is its role in metabolism. Muscle is metabolically active tissue, meaning it requires energy (calories) to maintain. The more muscle mass you have, the higher your resting metabolic rate (RMR), which is the number of calories your body burns at rest. As you age, you naturally experience a decline in muscle mass, a condition known as sarcopenia. This leads to a slower metabolism.

I could go on and on.......

You don't have to do what I did; that's my choice. But you should have resistance training when using GLP's, esp. if you're over 50.

 

[CharlieBrown]

It's hard and unlikely to add a meaningful amount of muscle fiber while aggressively cutting weight, it's much more practical to add fiber while bulking.

With the assumption that the average person that came here was looking to lose considerable weight, the more practical goal seems to be preservation of lean mass/muscle fiber rather than trying to actually build muscle.


I've thought about making a thread about my data along the way, but let's put some of it in the post.

In the first 4-6 weeks of starting a GLP you'll shed the easy "water weight", the glycogen depletion and water, inflammation reduction, sodium/water normalizing, blood plasma volume normalizing.

Due to scheduling dumbness, I didn't get my starting weight Dexa near 12/12/25, my first Dexa was 7 weeks in to my GLP journey... there's some hinkiness with the data, which I'll bring up on my scan later this month and see if I can improve my confidence in the accuracy of the numbers below.

Dexa Data:

Metric	01/30/2026	03/25/2026	04/30/2026	Total Change (1→3)
Total Weight	257.45 lb	238.77 lb	228.49 lb	-28.96 lb
Fat Mass	103.52 lb	77.26 lb	68.48 lb	-35.04 lb
Lean+BMC	162.61 lb (corrected)	161.50 lb	160.01 lb	-2.60 lb
Body Fat %	40.2%	32.4%	30.0%	-10.2 points

So from 1/30 to 4/30, using Dexa data I lost 92% fat and 8% lean mass, with some margin of error.

Hydration is the biggest user controlled variable for body comp scans, I try to hydrate the same every time (and fasted) to reduce that particular variable. I started creatine after the 3rd scan so I'd have a baseline to compare the creatine increase in lean mass.

AI is pretty content that my actual muscle fiber atrophy is fairly low, in the range of ~1lb, with a "large" band of uncertainty (+/- ~1lb) because of scan repeatability, hydration changes, and other variables.

You're in the 1%.
That is fantastic !!

 

[Cannonball72]

Probably hyperbole, but 10lb of weight gain from carbs would take 1000-1500g or 4000-6000 calories of carbs to accomplish. DEXA would show that as +10lb of lean mass, it does not show muscle fiber explicitly.

Read correctly, exaggerated for the sake of the point.

Muscles will be empty of glycogen and water after keto, carbs will refill/replenish.

Body builders have been using this approach for decades. “Better than Steroids” has a whole chapter explaining the science. Fascinating to me.

 

[Cannonball72]

I'm sorry, but I have to disagree a little bit. Especially because some people will loose a lot of weight and be happy without realizing they lost a lot of muscle mass in the process.

Muscle Mass: Maintaining a healthy level of muscle mass is crucial for your overall health, healthspan, and quality of life. From metabolic benefits to injury prevention to support for cognitive function, muscle plays a fundamental role in all of these important areas.
One of the primary reasons muscle mass matters is its role in metabolism. Muscle is metabolically active tissue, meaning it requires energy (calories) to maintain. The more muscle mass you have, the higher your resting metabolic rate (RMR), which is the number of calories your body burns at rest. As you age, you naturally experience a decline in muscle mass, a condition known as sarcopenia. This leads to a slower metabolism.

I could go on and on.......

You don't have to do what I did; that's my choice. But you should have resistance training when using GLP's, esp. if you're over 50.

Disagreement is cool, no apologies needed (joke) The intent of the post was to get some dialogue about real experience going. Then pair it up and share the inadequacies of pure science, which is frequently less than perfect, especially in this realm. But that’s the beauty, its directional and we learn from it to improve our trajectories.

 

[CNCCurrency]

I’m not asking you to apologize, but no one appointed you as chief human content creation manager either.

Your view of appropriate vs inappropriate is yours. You don’t speak for everyone.

The value of the article is substantial. A summary is a useful way to get key points.

 

[CharlieBrown]

Disagreement is cool, no apologies needed (joke) The intent of the post was to get some dialogue about real experience going. Then pair it up and share the inadequacies of pure science, which is frequently less than perfect, especially in this realm. But that’s the beauty, its directional and we learn from it to improve our trajectories.

Sorry, I'm Canadian. There we again....... 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣

And no, I don't know, "Office Glen". And if you're too young and have no idea what I'm talking about...

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGkX1u-pG3s

 

[Smiter]

The F is goin' on here? GLPs cause weight loss.. Excessive weight loss, unrestrained by gear & co., will cause muscle mass loss. It's biology 102. What's the issue?

 

[CharlieBrown]

Sorry, I'm Canadian. There we again....... 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣

And no, I don't know, "Office Glen". And if you're too young and have no idea what I'm talking about...

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGkX1u-pG3s

Okay, just one more.....

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TL01SReeOqE