The American Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) removes cannabis from the list of banned substances

The American Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) voted to remove cannabis from its list of prohibited substances for Division I players, with immediate effect.

NCAA Policy Change: Background and Implementation

The NCAA's decision comes about five months after the Division I Council proposed the rule change. The policy was officially adopted on Tuesday, reflecting a growing consensus that cannabis is not a performance-enhancing drug and should be treated in the same way as alcohol. This reform follows on from a policy change in 2022, which raised the THC threshold for college athletes, bringing NCAA regulations into line with those of the World Anti-Doping Agency. (AMA).

This newly adopted rule modifies NCAA drug testing policies for student sports championships and post-season soccer participation. It's important to note that it will be applied retroactively, meaning that all penalties players are currently subject to for cannabis-related offenses will be removed.

Josh Whitman, chairman of the board, said, «The NCAA's drug-testing program is intended to emphasize the integrity of the competition, and cannabis products do not offer a competitive advantage.».

Focus on health and well-being

The NCAA has emphasized that its drug-testing program is now focused on the health and well-being of student-athletes rather than punitive measures. According to an NCAA social media post, «Cannabinoids will be treated like other non-performance enhancing drugs, such as alcohol. NCAA members will focus on risk-reduction strategies related to problematic cannabis use, with an emphasis on the health of student-athletes.»

This change in policy follows a preliminary recommendation made last June by the NCAA Committee on Competitive Safeguards and Medical Aspects of Sport (CSMAS). The committee had advised all three NCAA governing bodies to remove cannabis from the list of banned substances. Although Divisions II and III have yet to vote on the proposal, the decision is a sign of a broader trend towards re-evaluating the use of cannabis in sport.

Wider implications and responses

This decision is part of a broader movement within various sports organizations to re-evaluate cannabis testing policies in the context of widespread state legalization. For example, the NFL and its players' union have agreed to end suspensions related to cannabis use as part of a collective bargaining agreement in 2020. The NFL has also funded research into the potential of CBD as an effective alternative to opioids and explored its therapeutic benefits for pain management and neuroprotection against concussion.

Similarly, the’Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) announced in December that it was withdrawing cannabis from its list of substances prohibited to athletes. However, despite these progressive measures, discrepancies remain at state level, such as the California Athletic Commission, which imposes sanctions for THC levels above a certain limit, in line with the guidelines of AMA.

Political and social reactions

The NCAA's policy change has prompted a variety of reactions. The Deputy Earl Blumenauer (D-OR), Co-Chairman of the Congressional Cannabis Caucus, America is slowly, surely coming to its senses after 50 years of a failed war on drugs«.»

He also said that the decision came at the right time, since Sha'Carri Richardson qualifies for the 2024 Olympics, an opportunity she had previously lost due to a positive THC test.

NCAA reform recognizes the ineffectiveness of previous policies that banned, tested and penalized athletes for cannabis use. The organization now emphasizes a harm reduction approach, based on extensive research and expert opinion, including physicians and addiction experts. This change in policy reflects a broader recognition that cannabis use does not provide a competitive advantage, and places the emphasis on the overall health of athletes.

Future directions

While the NCAA's decision represents an important step, discussions and debates around the use of cannabis in sport continue. For example, the’AMA maintains its ban on cannabis, arguing that consumption by athletes violates the «spirit of sport».» and can potentially impair judgment, posing risks to others.

Advocates of this cause have lobbied WADA to reconsider its position, particularly in the wake of high-profile cases such as the suspension of Sha'Carri Richardson. The US Anti-Doping Agency (USADA), the White House and President Joe Biden all said that international rules on cannabis should evolve.

In a similar vein, an NFL player recently sued the league and his former team, the Denver Broncos, for employment discrimination after being fined over half a million dollars for testing positive for THC, despite using a synthetic cannabinoid that had been prescribed to him.