From the article:

This study has limitations due to a lack of detailed cannabis consumption data and potential misclassification.

First, the dose makes the poison. I'm arguing that no meaningful association can be drawn from this study - it doesn't factor in total consumption or even what cannabinoids are being taken and even when, the consumption route, the purity or legitimacy of the substance, and at what frequency it is taken. Every single thing I mentioned is extremely, extremely significant - hence my previous certain and precise statements.

It's also reliant on identifying participants based on cannabis-related diagnoses, which doesn't sound like an accurate dataset at all. There are plenty of people who go to the doctor that use cannabis that 1) don't disclose it 2) aren't classified as having a use disorder either through omission or other potential reasons like downplaying use. I don't know about other people, but I would be more likely to disclose cannabis use, and the extent of use (which could result in a substance (ab)use diagnosis/other cannabis-related diagnosis); if I was feeling unwell.

This is what the article is doing, but in the context of a behavior-altering substance like cannabis.

From the article:

While the authors note that more research is needed to fully explain the association between cannabis and diabetes, it may come down to insulin resistance and unhealthy dietary behaviors.

That was not the focus of the study. They controlled for several factors, but there are limitations - which they readily admit. I'm arguing that the limitations are more significant than they argue. As for unhealthy dietary behaviors specifically, the authors loosely agree that it merits for further study, but this study did not focus on looking at the nitty-gritty of people's diets, specifically in the context of cannabis use to support their assertion of associating cannabis use with type 2 diabetes.

No part of the article does that. If you’re only reading clickbait titles, you’re doing it wrong. Quite the contrary, it’s fully transparent and reasonable in its purpose.

No meaningful association can be made from the data. It's flawed for reasons that I explained above. There are also any number of (potentially undiagnosed) conditions that can co-occur with diagnosed cannabis use that e.g. increase appetite/calorie intake or other relevant behaviors, that may not show up on lab tests/etc. which (at least in part) could explain the results, contributing to the development and diagnosis of type 2 diabetes. This is an extremely limited and loose association - best case scenario. There simply needs to be greater data clarity/study focus and breadth of data.

No part of the article suggests that, and directly states the possible explanation is a change in eating habits.

The authors note that more research is needed on the long-term endocrine effects of cannabis use and whether diabetes risks are limited to inhaled products or other forms of cannabis such as edibles.

I was repeating this. There is no meat, but this all still merits further study - which I readily admitted.

You could've just asked why I feel the way I do instead of assuming misunderstanding and dissecting my response to the article/study. It would've likely made for better conversational flow. "Demonizing" was admittedly hyperbole, but it's a strong claim to make an association between cannabis use and type 2 diabetes and I don't think I am convinced with the supporting evidence presented.