Study: Army Recruits With Past Pot Use Render Same Performance As Peers & Less Likely To Leave Over Health Issues

A new government-funded analysis of U.S. Army recruits has shined a light on the relationship between past marijuana use among U.S. Army recruits and their overall performance. A RAND Corporation’s analysis revealed that past cannabis consumption had little effect on overall performance, reported Marijuana Moment and that recruits with histories of marijuana use are as likely as their peers to rise in the ranks of the Army.  

Key Highlights From The Report  

On the other hand, the report noted that recruits with documented histories of cannabis use were more likely to leave the Army over that issue and less likely to leave because of health or performance issues.

In terms of achieving a higher rank in the Army, past cannabis use seemed to have no impact as former consumers became sergeants or higher on as regular a basis as their non-cannabis consuming peers.

Another important takeaway from the study revealed that the current cannabis legalization trend sweeping the U.S. has not notably affected recruit outcomes.

“Contrary to expectations, waivered recruits and recruits with a documented history of marijuana or behavioral health conditions are not uniformly riskier across all dimensions,” the analysis concluded “In some cases, they are historically more likely to perform better.”

The report focused on waivers that enable applicants to be reconsidered by the Army after their initial disqualification for many reasons, one of them being marijuana usage. This means that those applicants whose cannabis tests came back positive, or who had a documented history of use, need waivers to enlist. People suffering from attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), anxiety disorders or depression also need waivers to be considered to serve in the Army.

The study examined the records of every recruit who entered the U.S. Army from fiscal 2001 to fiscal 2012, analyzing them all through 2018.

 “Without waivers, a failed drug test for marijuana would block the one-third of American 18-year-olds who say they have used marijuana at least once in the past year,” a RAND official highlighted in a blog post covering results “Recruits who make it into the U.S. Army despite low-level histories of marijuana use perform no worse, overall than other soldiers. That should be welcome news in recruiting offices nationwide.”

Past Marijuana Use And Misconduct Offenses Make The Difference 

Interestingly, the analysis showed that recruits with a documented history of using cannabis and a non-traffic offense waiver were 32.7% more likely to leave the Army over misconduct (non-related to drug abuse) and 72.9% more likely for drug abuse. Furthermore, they were also 81% more likely to get a demotion.

By contrast, recruits with a history of marijuana use and a non-traffic offense waiver who left the Army were 47% less likely to leave because of health-related issues and 40.8% less likely over performance issues. 

As such, the report indicated an important difference between recruits with only a documented history of marijuana and those who also have misconduct offenses.

“For example, separation for drug abuse is less likely for recruits with only a documented history of marijuana without any misconduct offenses,” the report noted, “and (unlike those who also have misconduct offenses) they are no more likely to have a suspension of favorable person status than any other recruit.”

In conclusion, the authors note: “The implication is that the Army should continue to carefully screen recruits with a documented history of marijuana but should be less concerned with these recruits if they have no misconduct offenses.”

Meanwhile, the Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee reviewed a bill that would ask Veterans Affairs (VA) to run clinical trials on the potential benefits of cannabis for the treatment of military veterans suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and chronic pain.

The measure was not openly discussed but rather received written testimony opposing it and calling it “redundant.”

Photo: Courtesy of Scandinavian Backlash on Unsplash