The contrast with "vigorous aerobic exercises" is also interesting. The study looked at
> "Aerobic exercise interventions included climbing stairs, jogging, brisk walking, and cycling. Exercise intensity in the aerobic exercise group was monitored. The maximum heart rate was estimated as 208 − (0.7 × age in years)."
which makes you wonder how much the findings compare to the well known benefits of zone-2 HR aerobic training. "Vigorous" is a bit of weird term that suggests very different things between different people. Low HR cardio is usually not considered "vigorous" at all.
Another broader question would be whether maximizing lowered blood pressure is more important than getting people doing "vigorous" aerobic exercise, which brings a whole host of important benefits along with lowering blood pressure. Most people should get a lot more aerobic exercise and use relaxation methods, but I would probably recommend aerobic exercise first.