I did a bit of a double-take at the headline because it seems to imply that one can grow stronger while calorie-restricted, which is contrary to common practice around strength development - caloric surplus is generally understood to be necessary for muscle growth.

I've only read the abstract, but the title as I interpreted it seems misleading:

> One study showed that individuals on calorie restriction lost muscle mass and an average of 20 pounds of weight over the first year and maintained their weight for the second year. However, despite losing muscle mass, calorie restriction participants did not lose muscle strength, indicating calorie restriction improved the amount of force generated by each unit of muscle mass, called muscle specific force.

So even if force per unit increased, overall mass decreased and total strength was unchanged. I guess the title is technically correct but the implication is off. This might be better phrased as "calorie restriction in humans doesn't incur as much muscle/strength loss as previously thought", which is still an interesting result.