I started a huge reply to rebut some stuff and/or clarify but...that's not the point here! Not here to argue. Thanks for your input.

It's pretty clear that different people want different things out of exercise, and will have different individual risk factors based on what they're doing.

Thinking about it more, I know that weight (fat) loss is often a goal for my exercise, and I think it's hard to do that while lifting. With running it's simple: Loosely track calories, and each mile on the road gives about 150 extra calories to play with. When I've tried to lose weight while lifting, I usually end up really hungry and struggle to find a balance.

For people interested in fat loss, the relevant benefit of strength training is that it provides a signal to your body to hold on to as much muscle as possible. (Usually in conjunction with eating sufficient amounts of protein during your fat loss phase.)

Without strength training, you're as likely to lose muscle as you are to lose fat. (E.g., lose a pound per week on the scale and 50% may be fat tissue and 50% may be muscle tissue.)

With strength training, the ratio skews towards losing mostly or even entirely fat without losing muscle while having the same rate of weight loss all things being equal. (E.g., lose a pound per week on the scale and 90% may be fat tissue and 10% may be muscle, or 100% fat and 0% muscle.)

For people sufficiently new to strength training or for people who are sufficiently overfat, it's even possible to build new muscle tissue while losing fat, though this gets less and less likely the more advanced you get and the leaner you get. (E.g., lose a pound per week on the scale and 1.25 lbs of fat might be lost while 0.25 pounds of muscle might be gained.)

Fat loss is really as simple as: calories in < calories out. There are finer details that determine how your body reacts to different meals, like dense, calorie rich food leaving you hungry for more and so you eat more, as opposed to voluminous, low calorie foods filling you up, but it really is as simple as that. No complex diet required. No exercise required.

It’s contrary to popular belief, but the truth is in the numbers. The calories burned in the most intense cardio session are negligible compared to your next meal, and with calorie trackers it’s something everyone can see now for themselves. Running is good for cardiovascular health and some people enjoy it for various reasons, but it’s not the tool for managing weight.

Interestingly, lifting weights over time does positively affects fat loss. Maintaining every additional pound of muscle takes more energy than maintaining a pound of body fat, and so having more muscle means you burn more calories by just breathing and existing. You don’t need to become a body building hulk for this effect to have a noticeable impact, either. Muscle is denser than fat. But, as with cardio, don’t bother measuring your calories burned for a weightlifting session. The benefit happens outside the gym.

If you get hungry between meals, drink more water (most people don’t drink enough, anyway) and have a lot of popcorn on hand to snack on. Popcorn is so voluminous yet has basically no calories, helping manage appetite.

The other big trick with weight is to develop consistent diet habits that you’ll follow consistently forever. Slow and steady wins the race. If you go hard and fast you might temporarily reach you goal but you won’t be able to maintain it. You need to develop habits that you’ll follow for life, because without it the fat will just come back later as your calories in go above your calories out.

> I know that weight (fat) loss is often a goal for my exercise, and I think it's hard to do that while lifting

Agreed. Diet controls weight, exercise controls fitness. I've lost tons of weight while having varying levels of lifting/cardio, sometimes almost no exercise at all. Just eat fewer calories and more substance: cabbage, broccoli, things like that.