Bah, another example of bad science reporting. Here's the Guardian version of this: http://www.theguardian.com/science/sifting-the-evidence/2015/feb/16/does-sm

Bah, another example of bad science reporting. Here's the Guardian version of this: http://www.theguardian.com/science/sifting-the-evidence/2015/feb/16/does-smoking-skunk-cause-psychosis-but-milder-cannabis-doesnt http://www.theguardian.com/science/sifting-the-evidence/2015... > The Mail on Sunday has shouted that ‘cannabis TRIPLES psychosis risk’ and that skunk is to blame for ‘1 in 4 of all new serious mental disorders’. Is this what the study they cite shows? Well, no, but it’s really interesting research which could advance our understanding of the relationship between cannabis and psychosis. > However, the authors clearly point out that they cannot be sure the association seen in their study is causal. Edit: Hilariously, here's a later Guardian article: http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/feb/16/skunk-cannabis-triples-risk-psychotic-episodes-study http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/feb/16/skunk-cannabi... > Sir Robin Murray, professor of psychiatric research at King’s College London, said there was now clear evidence for a causal link between smoking strong cannabis and the risk of mental illness. Great to see some consistent messages here. Wtf @ Guardian.