This gets cited here weekly, usually second-hand, so it is worth setting out what it does and does not establish.
Training does two things here and only one of them is on the scale. It protects lean mass — which is the reason to do it — and it contributes modestly to the deficit, which is the reason people start and then quit when the arithmetic disappoints them. In a deep deficit, resistance work is the priority and high-volume cardio competes with recovery.
Where I think it is weakest: the comparator does most of the work in how this gets reported, and it is not the comparator most people think they are citing.
What I am after is what training is actually for during a large deficit, because framing it as calorie burn sets people up to quit when the arithmetic disappoints them. Tell me what I have not thought of.
Note on sourcing:
Figures above are from the primary publication rather than the press summary. If a number here disagrees with one you have, post yours and we will work out which of us is reading a secondary source.