Cannabis Is Bad, Bad, Bad. So Say The Feds, The NFL, And Life Insurance Companies

We all know how the Feds treat marijuana as a Schedule 1 narcotic, deeming it as dangerous as heroin and more dangerous than OxyContin or meth. Yeah, right. But we are used to that.

What is crazy though is how some companies actually seem to buy into this over-the-top classification of pot.


The NFL for one. It is widely believed that many (most?) NFL players use cannabis either for recreational or medicinal purposes, or both (so much so that the NFL is beginning to re-think its marijuana policy). The medicinal purposes are mostly to deal with the constant physical pain of playing in the NFL. Some take it to avoid having to take more powerful (and potentially far more harmful) drugs for the pain. The NFL has traditionally treated marijuana use very harshly, as recently evidenced by Josh Gordon’s season-long suspension after testing positive for cannabis.

This reefer madness attitude also extends to most public and private employers, with few exceptions. Virtually every State’s marijuana laws allow employers to fire people for testing positive for marijuana. If an employer will tolerate addictions to alcohol and prescription pain pills (which are certainly more destructive and debilitating than marijuana), why the hypocritical stance when it comes to marijuana, especially in States where cannabis is legal?

Life insurance companies also seem to have a reefer madness mentality. We are aware of a case where an individual admitted on a life insurance application that he used medical marijuana (instead of Ambien) a few times a year as a sleep remedy for jet-lag. He admitted this on his life insurance application and the life insurance companies deemed him to be a “drug-user” and doubled the monthly cost of his life insurance policy. Had this person admitted to frequent use of Ambien instead, his premiums would have remained the same.

This all goes back to the fundamental and underlying issue that we will not be achieving marijuana rationality unless and until Congress re-thinks its marijuana drug policy. At minimum, we need it stricken as a Schedule 1 narcotic.

One response to “Cannabis Is Bad, Bad, Bad. So Say The Feds, The NFL, And Life Insurance Companies”

  1. I read this before attending the MJBA event and enjoyed speaking with a few people to begin to debunk the third “bad” in your blog post. A select few other companies I represent do not test for THC and if an applicant admits to using marijuana, the company would typically rate the case as a smoker. There is one question on the health history part of the application, though, which reads like this (for one company),

    “In the last 10 years, has the Proposed Insured used cocaine, barbiturates, amphetamines, heroin, narcotics, stimulants, hallucinogens or other controlled substances or habit forming drugs not prescribed by a physician?”

    I do not advise my clients how to answer this or any other health question but I can see how some people might read “controlled substances” to equal a YES answer to this question in regards to marijuana use. Though MJ is regulated by the State of Washington, it is not a “controlled substance” at the state level, right? (please, please
    correct me if I’m wrong!) So if I were reading this as a resident of Washington
    first, and a US citizen second, I would answer this differently if my allegiances
    were reversed.

    Thank you for continuing to put out excellent material on the tectonic shift that is underway in our culture, our economy, and our legal system around marijuana. My grandparents would roll over in their grave, but I know my grandkids will one day look at me like they’ve seen a three-headed goat when I tell them that marijuana was once
    illegal and taboo.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *