Great article. Like you said, no new findings, just a framework for some common sense notions:
1 - Diet is essential for losing weight
2 - Vigorous exercise yields better results than low level exercise
3 - Building muscle mass increases resting metabolism
On the last point, tonight's 20 20 carried this
April 13, 2007 — "Cardio kills," says Jim Karas in his new book, "The Cardio-Free Diet."
"Cardiovascular exercise kills a weight-loss plan, your internal organs, your immune system, your time and your motivation. If your true goal is to lose weight, interval strength training is the only way to go," says Karas, an ABC News correspondent, celebrity trainer and fitness expert.
When he first tried to lose weight as a 21-year-old, Karas found that he would work up an enormous appetite after running several miles. So while his cardiovascular health improved he still wasn't losing weight.
He grew more interested in strength training and started exercising with weights. In a short period of time he noticed changes in his body's composition. Gradually, experimenting on himself, he started doing more strength exercise and less cardio — and his weight went down.
His experiment resulted in a cardio-free exercise program that includes two routines with 10 exercises. Every two weeks, after beginning with Phase 1, you add two exercises as you progress to the next phase, ultimately getting to Phase 4.
I still like to do cardio, but this is food for thought
BTW - Karas said that he has women on his program consume 1200 calories a day - only about 60% of the recommended caloric intake for the average woman. So, of course they lose weight - the key seems to be, sans the cardio, the low calorie diet isn't short circuited. But I wonder how you can build muscle during a calorie deficit. Maintain it, perhaps, but build it?