Or they like good science that doesn't attribute causality without evidence? "Cannabis use increases the chance of psychosis" is just one of the three potential relationships. The other two are "The chance of psychosis increases cannabis use" and "A third factor increases both the use of cannabis and the chance of psychosis".
In reality, the effect is probably not just one, but some mixture of all three. It is extremely likely that people are self-medicating against psychosis with cannabis, that cannabis can increase the risk of psychosis in some people, and that the risk of psychosis is usually co-morbid with other mental health issues for which people also self medicating.
A study like this does nothing to help us understand the link, but yet the Authors seem willing to make strong claims about that link:
> The researchers suggested that if high potency cannabis was no longer available, the incidence of psychosis in Amsterdam would be expected to halve from 37.9 to 18.8 per 100,000 people per year, while in London, it would fall from 45.7 to 31.9 per 100,000 people per year.
That is irresponsible and bad science. It should be called out as such.