Maybe it's only me, but "cannabis scientists" seems another one of these nonsense words that content creators make up to make their product sound smart. It slowly diffuses into mainstream journalism, and I'm really sorry for the NYTimes if their readers don't know what a chemist or biologist is.
Call me Don Quixote, but I think it's a slippery slope.
NYTimes sent a journalist to Denver, who bought a chocolate bar at a dispensary, went back to their hotel room and ate it. Then, started seeing kaleidoscopes and curled up into the fetal position until it all wore off. No long term harm of course, but one freaked out New Yorker.
Turned out, the chocolate bar was 8 doses! and the journalist had NEVER used any cannabis in their life prior to ingesting.
This is one reason I'm not an advocate of edibles, or extracted products in general.
So, that's the context of this article. NYT and NY in general are fighting cannabis all the way. The east coast of the US really is 50 years behind, and not just regarding cannabis.
I also agree with your criticism of the news hype of "cannabis scientists".
As I say in my article comment, just smoke the plant, stop trying to turn it into jet fuel...