That doesn't sound right. So they took hair from your legs and it came up negative for THC metabolites? I would think that any THC metabolites they would be looking for in the hair on your head would also be found in any other hair on your body. Hair's hair.

 

And hair tests are wildly inaccurate. It's no big shock to me at all.

 

Hell, even the standard UAs have a fairly high number of false positives. I don't know if an insurance company will pay for the more accurate (more expensive) tests.

 

Anything has issues. UAs are far more accurate than hair tests, in terms of false positives. And when it comes to insurance, it's a pretty safe bet that they'll get the best testing they find to be reasonable.

 

You should probably look for different insurance if they require a drug screening for pot. It sounds like they are looking for any excuse to deny a claim.

You – I was bitten by a poisonous snake and had to go to the ER.
Them – Did you smoke pot in January of 2005?
You – Yes, probably.
Them – Protocol says that you are denied coverage because you used an illegal substance.
You – What? Why does that matter?
Them – Because it’s illegal.
You - But how is it responsible for the accident?
Them – Because it’s illegal.
You – But I was sober at the time and it was an accident of nature.
Them – But you smoked pot January of 2005.
You – Why would that matter? I was sober when I was bitten last week.
Them – Because you smoked pot.
You – That was 2 ½ years ago! Why is it relevant now?!?!
Them – Because it’s illegal.
You – I wasn’t high at the time!!
Them – But you were in January of 2005.
You – It’s August 2007!!!
Them – It was illegal back then as well.

 

they need 1 1/2 inches for a 90 day sample, so i took the ends of the hair, where it was clean.