I meant "control" in a scientific sense, it's the second most important variable that these articles never mention. Dosage of actives = Potency x Quantity. If

I meant "control" in a scientific sense, it's the second most important variable that these articles never mention. Dosage of actives = Potency x Quantity. If you say that potency of cannabis is 3x higher than it used to be, that's significant, but you need to qualify that by saying how much a typical user would consume in 1 sitting. 1) If people smoke as much as they did in the 70s then they're ingesting 3x as much THC. I believe that this can cause more mental health issues, but it has everything to do with the total consumption of THC, not potency of the product. 2) If they're smoking 1/3rd as much as they did in the 70s then their total THC intake hasn't changed and there must be other explanations for increased mental health issues. Perhaps most notably, severe mental health issues have been on the rise since the dawn of social media. This lack of nuance makes the article alarmist rather than genuinely informative. It only serves to further perpetuate myths and simplistic takes like "cannabis is unsafe because it's too strong".