FDA Declares Popular Alt-Medicine Kratom an Opioid (nbcnews.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from NBC News: The Food and Drug Administration declared the popular herbal product kratom to be an opioid on Tuesday, opening a new front in its battle to get people to stop using it. New research shows kratom acts in the brain just as opioids do, FDA Commissioner Dr. Scott Gottlieb said in a statement. And he said the agency has documented 44 cases in which kratom at least helped kill people -- often otherwise healthy young people.

"Taken in total, the scientific evidence we've evaluated about kratom provides a clear picture of the biologic effect of this substance," Gottlieb wrote. "Kratom should not be used to treat medical conditions, nor should it be used as an alternative to prescription opioids. There is no evidence to indicate that kratom is safe or effective for any medical use." The FDA released detailed accounts of several of the deaths. The victims often had mixed kratom with other substances, including chemicals taken out of inhalers and found in over-the-counter cold and flu drugs.

Comments

You know, if people want to....

[cayenne8]

...voluntarily take themselves OUT of the gene pool, who are we to protect them from themselves?

Maybe this is just nature at work, and putting some needed chlorine into the gene pool?

Re:You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

The point is, kratom is not dangerous. This is just government over reach.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

If it behaves like an opioid then people need to be aware of the danger associated with it.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

It doesn't though.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[bobbied]

Where I get your position....I'm not sure I agree.

It seems to me that the FDA has a purpose and if something being sold openly in stores is killing folks, they might just have the responsibility to respond. I think they see this as a matter of public safety, and I think they have at least some justification for this. They've restricted other products for less, even if those being killed are being stupid and using more than recommended to get high...

Now calling something an opioid that's not actually derived from similar sources as opium does seem a bit heavy handed, because that puts this substance on a path to be made illegal to posses or use. It may act in similar ways as opium, however it's not actually opium...

Re:You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not killing people whatsoever. All the people who had it in their system also had heroin and other bad things in their system.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[Khyber]

Yes, yes it does. It binds to many of the same receptors.

It is how I got my mother off of opiate medications after her surgery. Sure it isn't as effective at killing pain but it is nowhere near as addictive (still is addictive) and much easier to quit using once you desire to do so.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

Right, it binds to the same receptors, but is not an opiate. It just emulates an opiate, and it won't kill you.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

source? Cause TFA has sources that say it does.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

Try Tide Pods. They don't behave like an opioid either. Go ahead, you'll be fine.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[fafalone]

Yeah I'm with you, screw using kratom, go back to heroin or $randomfentanalog instead. Way safer.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

Their science is terrible. They are arguing kratom is deadly because they've found it in the system of dead people. But they don't acknowledge that these people likely died from the heroin and prescription pills in their system, not the mild kratom.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

The point is, kratom is not dangerous. This is just government over reach.

If you're looking for something to target with government overreach, then let's start where it makes the MOST fucking sense by tackling the bullshit marijuana policy.

ENOUGH of ruining people's lives with a harmless plant.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[h4ck7h3p14n37]

The Man is just trying to protect the addiction industry. We can't have people curing themselves of opiate dependency using natural products now, can we?

44 deaths? Acetaminophen kills more than 450 people per year and it's still sold over the counter.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[Archangel Michael]

FDA has a purpose

Yes. But probably not the purpose its name implies. When you can't outline PROVABLE facts about FOOD, because only DRUGS (FDA approved) can treat illness and disease. That's why if you get Scurvy, they will PRESCRIBE vitamin C, but if you say Citrus Fruits, strawberry's can kiwis can cure scurvy, you're breaking the law turning food into drugs.

Once you realize this, then it all makes better sense.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

"Over reach" is not what I call pharma lobbying the FDA to ban Kratom.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[arglebargle_xiv]

Beat me to it. They don't want it to compete with the opioids they're selling by the million, it's bad for business.

Re: You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

https://youtu.be/PmibYliBOsE

Re:You know, if people want to....

[harrkev]

Not quite. Close, though.

The problem is testing. To get a drug approved takes mega-bucks. However, with conventional medicines, the company has a patent on the medicine so they get a guaranteed period of income.

Kratom, however, is just a plant. It could be a wonder-cure, but nobody will pay millions for the testing because, once approved, anybody with a greenhouse could sell it for less.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[BlueStrat]

Right, it binds to the same receptors, but is not an opiate. It just emulates an opiate, and it won't kill you.

You forgot the important part that's mostly the reason behind this FDA move.

It takes money away from lobbying & contributing pharma companies, health care networks/hospitals, clinics, doctors, and franchise pharmacies. Same reason marijuana is still classified as a Schedule I Narcotic by the FDA.

That, and the billions of dollars in kickbacks to US officials from SA drug cartels hidden in offshore accounts

Always follow the money.

Strat

Re:You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

The point is, kratom is not dangerous. This is just government over reach.

If you're looking for something to target with government overreach, then let's start where it makes the MOST fucking sense by tackling the bullshit marijuana policy.

ENOUGH of ruining people's lives with a harmless plant.

I'd be a lot more sympathetic to pot if the potheads wouldn't continually insist that marijuana is "harmless", which it obviously isn't. Last thing I need is "harmless" drug dealers getting my kids hooked on "harmless" drugs. Fact is that you ruin your own life on your own decisions, don't try to ruin everyone else's.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[pr0fessor]

If you go to a doctor because you have scurvy he will prescribe vitamin c to get you better fast and recommend you change your diet so you don't have a problem with it again.

if you go to a doctor and he just happens to find a vitamin deficiency that's not causing an illness he will recommend changing your diet because that promotes long term health and only prescribe a supplement if that fails

If your doctor is having you follow up constantly prescribing medications that you would need to be on for the rest of your life instead of trying to find a way for you live without medication then you are very sick (maybe diabetes) or you need a second opinion.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[rogoshen1]

This is probably just a fun way to shoe-horn in banning designer drugs (even those that are yet to have been formulated), without having to actually go through all the trouble of specifically banning anything in specific terms.

Example: there's a ton of different cannabinoids (natural, and synethetic). A precedent like this would allow for the banning of all similar substances (natural or synthetic) because they 'bind to the same receptors as THC'.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

The point is, kratom is not dangerous. This is just government over reach.

If you're looking for something to target with government overreach, then let's start where it makes the MOST fucking sense by tackling the bullshit marijuana policy.

ENOUGH of ruining people's lives with a harmless plant.

I'd be a lot more sympathetic to pot if the potheads wouldn't continually insist that marijuana is "harmless", which it obviously isn't. Last thing I need is "harmless" drug dealers getting my kids hooked on "harmless" drugs. Fact is that you ruin your own life on your own decisions, don't try to ruin everyone else's.

Yes, it is harmless because it cannot create addiction or permanent damage, and the LD 50 levels are essentially impossible to reach. Caffeine has killed more people than cannabis has. And don't even get me started on the damage alcohol does every day, along with cigarettes, smartphones, and plenty of other legal products your kids can and will get hooked on. Do yourself a favor and educate yourself about marijuana. You won't come off as such a fucking moron next time.

Re: You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

Marijuana is addictive to some people. It's a small percentage, but it's nonzero.

Still, the benefits of legalization far outweigh the drawbacks.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[The Grim Reefer]

Last thing I need is "harmless" drug dealers getting my kids hooked on "harmless" drugs.

So do you also protest your local liqueur store because alcohol dealers are going to get your kids hooked on it? While I agree with you that it's not harmless, it certainly seems to be less so than alcohol from what I've seen.

It seems to me that if the government can tax and control marijuana like it does alcohol, then it greatly reduces the viability of it as a business for drug dealers. Plus people actually know what they are purchasing and won't be getting a product that's been laced with who knows what. It also removes a large chunk of income from organized criminals.

Are you such a piss poor parent that you can't educate your kids about such things? It's been my experience that happy well adjusted educated kids don't go out looking for drug dealers. And with the demand for drugs, it's not like most drug dealers are going around looking for customers. Maybe it's different where you live.

Re: You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

Tens of thousands of people WILL whine about it on the internet, but paying $100 bucks into a fund to study it, no fricking way.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[Obfuscant]

So do you also protest your local liqueur store because alcohol dealers are going to get your kids hooked on it?

If a local liquor store sells to kids, then yes, I would, because it is illegal for them to do so. There are also well-known and well distributed warnings regarding alcohol.

Are you such a piss poor parent that you can't educate your kids about such things?

Who educates the parents? This is a "natural plant product". What's the danger?

It's been my experience that happy well adjusted educated kids don't go out looking for drug dealers.

You don't have to "go out looking" to find kratom dealers.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[Theils Blood Boy]

I don't want my kid using drugs but I'd much rather my child not have a public arrest record that keeps them from getting a job. I said arrest. If you are arrested and released with no charges you still get an arrest record and it's just about as difficult to clear as a criminal record. You're unaware of such things because arrest records are private in russia, Boris.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[quonset]

If it behaves like an opioid then people need to be aware of the danger associated with it.

Why? No one has bothered to listen to the dangers of drug use which have been going on for decades, nor had second thoughts as people of all walks of life, including celebrities, die from drug use.

You have to remember, people are smarter than the experts and when told something may kill you, or are shown people who have died from using/doing the same, they'll be sure to show you how smart they are by doing the very opposite.

As some on here would say, it's their life. Let them do what they want. They'll die just to prove you wrong.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

...voluntarily take themselves OUT of the gene pool, who are we to protect them from themselves?

Sure, take some rat poison and be done with it.

Don't just damage your brain and become a burden to the rest of us, wasting money to take care of you for the rest of your life.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[bobbied]

Yea, which is why I consider this a bit heavy handed by the FDC, they are side stepping the normal process here. Not that I would support legalization efforts, I don't, I just don't like the way the FDC is taking advantage of the perception of an opioid problem for something that really isn't an opioid derived from the usual sources.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[bobbied]

FDA has a purpose

Yes. But probably not the purpose its name implies. When you can't outline PROVABLE facts about FOOD, because only DRUGS (FDA approved) can treat illness and disease. That's why if you get Scurvy, they will PRESCRIBE vitamin C, but if you say Citrus Fruits, strawberry's can kiwis can cure scurvy, you're breaking the law turning food into drugs.

Once you realize this, then it all makes better sense.

LOL.. I guess you don't like the FDA at all then.. But in this case, we are not dealing with food are we?

Now if you are one of those people upset with the FDA because they take a dim view of medical claims made by supplement makers, I point out that we didn't have the FDA for a good part of our existence, and during that time literally ANYBODY could create some "medication" that cured everything from baldness and hoof rot to your wife's hair color and sell bottles of turpentine mixed with wood alcohol and tar on the street corners (and many people did). As long as you got out of town before folks got sick and moved faster than the rumor mill, you could make good money. The FDA fixed all that, thankfully. Yes they get a bit overbearing on this supplement thing at time, but I can see the FDA's point too. You simply CANNOT be allowed to make medical claims for things which are not licensed as drugs when you are selling them, or all the snake oil sales people would be free to ply their trade on the gullible again.

The FDA also deals with food safety and distribution issues and licensing actual drugs (prescription and over the counter) sold in this country. I think they are a necessary evil.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[The Grim Reefer]

So do you also protest your local liqueur store because alcohol dealers are going to get your kids hooked on it?

If a local liquor store sells to kids, then yes, I would, because it is illegal for them to do so. There are also well-known and well distributed warnings regarding alcohol.

And this is exactly my point. If marijuana is sold with state/federal oversight I would expect the same type of regulations. I believe the current regulations are if you have the cash you can get it in an unmarked bag. If it's sold and regulated in the same manner that alcohol is currently, then it would be much safer then the current situation.

Are you such a piss poor parent that you can't educate your kids about such things?

Who educates the parents? This is a "natural plant product". What's the danger?

Who educates them on alcohol currently? Hell, it's a just "natural yeast byproduct". It's yeast piss, what could possible be dangerous about that. Yeast is the stuff that's used to make bread.

It's been my experience that happy well adjusted educated kids don't go out looking for drug dealers.

You don't have to "go out looking" to find kratom dealers.

I thought we were discussing marijuana. At least that's the post I was replying to.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

It's an opiate. It isn't refined into a potent form like heroin, but it is still an opiate and could theoretically kill you by overdose - apparently one person managed that so far, which is hard to do with kratos. Why they regulate it the way they do is another question, but you're wrong to say it's not an opiate.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[MobyDisk]

According to the article, there are

44 cases in which kratom at least helped kill people — often otherwise healthy young people.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[ColdWetDog]

1) 44 people who had the substance in their system. Correlation is not causation.

2) 44 people is a teeny tiny number. About the same number of people that are killed by toasters.

3) All drugs are poisons (Paracelsus, 1580 or thereabouts).

Re:You know, if people want to....

[ColdWetDog]

Too lazy to look up the specifics but LOTS of drugs bind to opiate receptors. Including most antidepressants. It's an absolutely asinine way to attempt to regulate a drugs. It is fast, handy but it isn't science.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[ChrisMaple]

The FDA, like many federal agencies, has a long history of corruption and arresting innocent people. As long as these behaviors are intact, the FDA should not be making any decisions to prohibit anything. Since, in fact, these behaviors will never end as long as the FDA exists, it should be disbanded and a new agency created with far less scope and power. Basically, the FDA should do nothing but test for purity and shut down firms that sell adulterated products. Banning and chasing down mind-degrading drugs should be limited to the DEA.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

I read an article that said if you do a little more reading into those deaths and you will find that other substances or factors were present in many of them. But everyone has an agenda so do the research if you want to find the truth...

Re: You know, if people want to....

[c6gunner]

I'm willing to bet a fuck of a lot more people own toasters than take kratom. Most people have never even heard of it.

Re: You know, if people want to....

[BlueStrat]

Nigga please. Weed is Sched.1 because its an easy charge to lay on minorities and lefties. Try following the Rightwing Corpratist Agenda instead moran.

That was the original impetus that drove the creation of drug laws in the US. Chinese-opium, Hispanic/black-marijuana/cocaine.

Today however both liberals and many, many white middle-aged conservatives use marijuana. At the higher levels the reasons are as I stated in my first post, at street-level cop, it's about having yet another charge on the books available to use as a reason to harass/search/arrest, etc the 'little people' of whatever race or ethnicity if they happen to be guilty of perceived disrespect of cop, or they just need to pad their contact/arrest stats for the next performance review.

Strat

Re:You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

Bluestrat sucks nazi cocks in his hog barn, follow the money.

Re: You know, if people want to....

[c6gunner]

It takes money away from lobbying & contributing pharma companies, health care networks/hospitals, clinics, doctors, and franchise pharmacies. Same reason marijuana is still classified as a Schedule I Narcotic by the FDA.

Gotta love these idiotic conspiracy theories. The entire opioid market is worth only about $13 billion annually. That's about the same as the "diatery supplements" market, which is mostly useless garbage. On a global scale, diatery supplements are a $200 billion market, while opiods are only about $24 billion.

If things worked the way that simpletons like you think they do the alt-med and supplement markets would have far more sway over policy than "big pharma" and their eeeeevil pills.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not sure I agree with your stupidity of thinking "I'm not sure I agree. " is a reasonable basis for an enforcement action affecting 330 million people.

Perhaps, you should just sit this one out.

Re: You know, if people want to....

[c6gunner]

True. This is why I grow my own willow trees to make willow tea; because aspirin is too damn expensive.

Re: You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

Cite.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

Or you know, most of us aren't pussies and aren't afraid to take a risk for a reward. I don't need other assholes telling me what I can and can't do.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

How's conservative working out for ya? I knew there was more to your story. Always pushing for republicans to come down hard on those druggie minorities while having a crack momma. The hypocrisy is sooo tasty.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[fafalone]

And how many fatal overdoses were avoided because people were able to get off heroin (the primary use of kratom; some use it recreationally but most people use it for quitting harder opioids)? I'm guessing way more than 44. There's nobody that's going right now "Oh, well if the FDA makes kratom illegal that's it for me, I'm going to stop using opiates". No-bod-y. Users will invariably switch to a more dangerous opiate instead.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[fafalone]

You seem to be under the mistaken impression that if we replace prohibition with education, prevention, and treatment, using regulated commercial products, users would just OD. In reality, the number of addicts in general, and the percentage of addict ODs specifically, would plummet (see Portugal and Heroin Maintenance Programs).

Re: You know, if people want to....

[BlueStrat]

Gotta love these idiotic conspiracy theories. The entire opioid market is worth only about $13 billion annually.

Opioids are only one of the medications that kratom displaces, not to mention the doctor/health care appointments never made, tests not ordered/paid for, other treatments, specialist fees, medical billing/insurance, etc etc.

It's always about the money and control. Kratom (and marijuana) threatens that, so it (they) must go.

Gotta love these idiotic conspiracy theories.

No conspiracies required, just your bog-standard entities in an industry using the tools at their disposal to protect and grow their incomes as we see in other industries and business sectors on an almost daily basis in the news.

simpletons like you

Exsqueeze me? For someone who apparently only looks at issues surface-deep as you've demonstrated by only looking strictly at opioids in this case, you have no room to cast aspersions.

Strat

Re: You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

Pulled it out of his ass, like the rest of his posts in this thread.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

3) All drugs are poisons (Paracelsus, 1580 or thereabouts).

I think that we can all agree that Paracelsus was completely right when he was writing about the state of medicine of his days: pretty much all drugs of the day were horrible poisons. (Though, he didn't write it 40 years after his death but closer to 1530).

Paracelsus was a step forward in principle in that he recognized that chemistry was the way to go for drugs. Unfortunately the state of chemistry wasn't advanced enough in his time for it to have good results. He was also a step sideways in that he thought that magic was an importart part of medicine.

Paracelsus was right when he declared that the learned doctors of his time were dangerous quacks, but what he replaced them was a dangerous quackery where the main component of all drugs was mercury. Though, at least the astrological part of his medicine didn't kill patients.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[GuB-42]

Sure, it is not an opiate, it is an opioid. But it doesn't matter when it come to risks.

The difference is that opiates are extracted from the opium poppy, while opioids include all chemicals acting on opioid receptors. Morphine, codeine and heroin are opiates and opioids. Fentanyl and kratom are opioids but not opiates. The origin of the substance or whether it is natural or synthetic doesn't matter to your body.

Re: You know, if people want to....

[drinkypoo]

I'm willing to bet a fuck of a lot more people own toasters than take kratom. Most people have never even heard of it.

More people have toasters than an addiction to opiates, but if you've got your way, that will change. MAGA!

Re:You know, if people want to....

[crypticedge]

TFS literally says people have died from it.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

Where I get your position....I'm not sure I agree.

It seems to me that the FDA has a purpose and if something being sold openly in stores is killing folks, they might just have the responsibility to respond. I think they see this as a matter of public safety, and I think they have at least some justification for this. They've restricted other products for less, even if those being killed are being stupid and using more than recommended to get high...

Now calling something an opioid that's not actually derived from similar sources as opium does seem a bit heavy handed, because that puts this substance on a path to be made illegal to posses or use. It may act in similar ways as opium, however it's not actually opium...

Poor ignorant slave class worker thinking that the FDA is here to protect public safety. Its because of people like you, that think the FDA is here to actually help us, that will allow this to pass. "The guvment is just keeping us safe!" LMAO!!!

Re:You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

But in this case, we are not dealing with food are we?

A leaf of a tree is not food? What world do you live in? Mitragyna Speciosa (kratom) is a fucking tree, and the leaves are what people eat as a tea, chew, or swallow. If that isn't food, I don't know what is!

Re:You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

Cheese and milk bind to opiate receptors.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[rickb928]

Why is death the only 'harm' considered?

Re:You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

Good lord, do think for a minute. Being classified as an opiate does not mean it's illegal. Even heroin isn't fully illegal, it's used in hospitals under a different name as to not freak people out (something like dymoriphine or something similar). And remember, opiates (codeine) are in prescription cough syrup. Being labeled an opiate simply means it has properties similar to opiates and as such should be treated as such. Certain drugs should be avoided while using it as it could lead to death for example.

I swear, when people think opiates they only think of the super powerful ones and have no clue that it's an entire class of drugs, some of which are quite common. You just have to be careful with them do to their tendency to suppress various autonomic functions such as breathing and heart rate.

Re: You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

the Federal Analogue Act has been on the books since 1986...

Re: You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

No, it's zero.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

Good god why are you people so blind.

I'll spell this out for you.

Not knowing != ignoring.

Yes, people ignore the dangers frequently, but it's 1000x better than simply being unaware of the dangers.

Re: You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

Screw you, I have an addiction to toasters. You can't understand the suffering I go through every day when I'm forced to be separated from them because I have to go to work to make money to buy more toasters. They won't let me keep toasters on my desk. They said it was weird and it made people anxious.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[Talderas]

Now calling something an opioid that's not actually derived from similar sources as opium does seem a bit heavy handed, because that puts this substance on a path to be made illegal to posses or use. It may act in similar ways as opium, however it's not actually opium...

Opiates are drugs that are derived from opium. Opioids are chemicals which bind to the receptors that opium binds to. All opiates should be opioids but not all opioids are opiates. Fentanyl and methadone are two synthetic chemical opioids which are not derived from opium. If kratom binds to the same receptors as opiates then kratom is an opioid and the FDA is classifying them correctly.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

No offense, but literally tons of chemicals bind to delta receptors. Opioids aren't the only substance that do that. It's shitty reasoning to use.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[edtice1559]

More importantly, in order to bring a medication to market, there is a *lot* of data that is required. You can't just start selling and hope nobody does. The FDA isn't saying this product can't ever be sold just that it has to come to market like any other drug.

Re: You know, if people want to....

[Bengie]

Toasters are a gateway appliance into toaster ovens. You've never lived until you've cooked a small pizza in a toaster oven in a fraction the time of a full sized oven.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow... you need to sit back an chill a little and think a little harder about less dramatic and paranoid ( wait a second... )
reasons marijuana is illegal.
When the depression hit, there were large Chinese and Mexican labor forces that were competing for jobs. Local governments in California and Texas were concerned not only in people's willingness to abuse the drugs, but perhaps moreso, searched for ways to curb "undesirable" immigration especially in the depression where jobs were extremely scarce. Additionally there was the concern that this drug is so easily cultivated, it would be difficult to stop if there were not harsh penalties. You may recall that the nation also banned alcohol around this time. It was a product of society at the time, not hospitals, doctors and pharma.
Don't follow the money.. .just read actual factual sources and stop worrying that there's some sort of conspiracy.
You are giving all these people far too much credit.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

WRONG!
Prohibition had been repealed in 1933, and the Marijuana Tax Act was implemented in 1937

Congress mandated the growing of hemp for rope production since there were massive shortages during WW1

Hemp fiber was a direct competitor to operating paper mills (with many owned by Randolph Hearst was also deeply invested in lumber for those paper mills), and to emerging synthetic products like nylon.

These were the primary motivators for Hearst press to push the anti-marijuana stories in their newspapers, they just made use of existing prejudices to sell the story.

As far as "intentionally punishing liberals and black" that was the intent of President Nixon, who faced the Supreme Court throwing out the Marijuana Tax Act and making Marijuana legal, when he set up the DEA scheduling so that he could use it to pursue his political enemies

Re:You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

You are missing one very important difference. It does not depress breathing, unlike true opiates. Even if someone were to overdose, the chance of death is exponentially less than true opiates.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

If kratom is added to Schedule 1, then federal dollars cannot even be used to study the beneficial uses of it.

That is what has been done to Ibogaine, which is an effective way to get people off of Heroin this is used globally

Re:You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

But it ISN'T killing folks. Look at their data. They are counting people that overdosed on OTHER drugs if they had any kratom in their system, whether it had any correlation at all to death.

They even include people that died from "natural" causes such as falling out of a window, and hanging.

Their data is crap, that's the sad part.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[fafalone]

Love it when poorly informed comments get modded up by people who also don't know what's going on. The government is actively attempting to ban kratom. There was an emergency scheduling action against it, which was only slowed to a normal schedule action after popular outcry. Making this classification bolsters the case for scheduling, as alluded to in the very first sentence of the summary. Customs routinely seizes any kratom imports they find coming into the country.
Not all opiates should be treated the same. They're planning on putting kratom on Schedule I, aka a complete ban. In this case, no scheduling is appropriate, and in fact will cause great harm. I'm not objecting to the classification in general, but this finding goes a lot further than simply recognizing the obvious. Please try to refrain from trying to correct others on subjects where you're not closely following the topic.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[fafalone]

Well we can't have a cheap plant with no patents competing with methadone and buprenorphine, can we?

Re:You know, if people want to....

[fafalone]

Close; opiates are naturally occurring opioids. The endogenous chemicals morphine mimicks, e.g. endorphins and enkephalins, are also opiates. Then opioids are divided into synthetic (fentanyl) and semisynthetic (oxycodone, which is derived from the natural opium alkaloid thebaine).
This action by the FDA is going farther than just saying 'since this binds to opiate receptors it's an opioid', which was already a universally accepted scientific fact, it's an action designed to bolster the case for scheduling it and banning it.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[Green Mountain Bot]

Tylenol kills 150 people per year.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[Biogoly]

Just because a chemical is not derived from morphine (main opioid in opium) doesn't mean the FDA can't call it an "opioid". There are a handful of "synthetic" opioids out there...they are not found in nature, but nonetheless bind to the same receptors and create euphoric effects similar to morphine. Fentanyl and its derivatives would be probably the best example... a synthetic opioid orders of magnitude more powerful than morphine.

Re: You know, if people want to....

[Biogoly]

This is actually a great example. The pharmaceutical industry took "natural" salicylic acid, which caused horrible gastric upset, and created the much more palatable aspirin. There are loads of other examples of pharma taking products from nature, improving them and then patenting the resulting product for market. So the whole "it's a plant man, big pharma is keeping it down to protect their profits" is BS. If Kratom was this miracle plant, I'm sure pharma companies would be quick at work trying to unlock its secrets, but I strangely haven't heard anything about that. From what I can tell Kratom seems to have effects very similar to another synthetic opioid called tramadol...it's a weak opioid, but deceptively addictive. I've met plenty of people who have gotten hooked on tramadol.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

Not if we are protecting corporate profits over people

It is just sad to see federal customs enforcement being spent on keeping people from obtaining aids, while fentanyl, carphentanyl and w18 are being shipped to the country labeled as bulk chemicals

I believe that any physician who prescribes opioid medications must also provide a plan for getting the patient off of those medications. This would go a long way to limit the creation of new addicts and Ibogaine could be a be part of that process

Re: You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure, ignore all the available data and pretend that systemic racism in the justice system isn't real. That's what all the white people love to do.

Re: You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

Tylenol is taken by 200 million people per year.

Re: You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

You're ignoring the possibility that people might be more likely to take more drugs when on kratom than they would without it.

If people say it helps, it should be studied. But if it's associated with an unusually high number of deaths for the demographic that uses it, it should be treated with caution.

Re: You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

Yup, Iâ(TM)d like to follow the money trail on this one. The first time the FDA tried this, it used the examples of about a dozen people who died from/of Kratom, all of whom already had a lethal overdose of one or more other substances in their system. By that reasoning, breath mints are lethal.

Re: You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

I bet you can draw a very short line from this FDA action to lobbying from the same fine folks that shipped two million plus doses of opioids to a town of 1,300 in WV over two years.

Re: You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah cuz white kids never get busted for weed. Oh wait that happens every damn day.

The only reason they get light sentences is because the judge can actually understand their English.

Re: You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, most of the âoevictimsâ of Kratom cited in the first attempt already had a fatal overdose of another substance -or more than one -in their system.

Re: You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

If you think someone wonâ(TM)t fight for a billion or two, youâ(TM)re living under a rock.

Re: You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

No they died with kratom in their system, while also on OTHER non drugs taken as drugs. Read.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[fafalone]

The FDA and DEA want it placed on Schedule I, which will make it virtually impossible to study. And yeah, it's a plant, you absolutely should just be able to start selling it.

Re: You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure, ignore all the available data and pretend that systemic racism in the justice system isn't real.

Then why is it a fact that whites are shot by cops at a far higher rate than blacks nationwide? Go check the official numbers.

Stop projecting your racist hatred for white people onto others.

Re: You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

You don't need the FDA for proper labeling of something. Making claims that aren't supported by evidence is fraud, making claims about something that is proven to cause sickness or even death is at a minimum "manslaughter" ( in the case of death).

Push comes to shove if you want to stop snake oil salesman from selling something that isn't snake oil you need only require them to say what they know about whatever it is they are selling as snake oil. If the answer is "we k no ow nothing about this thing we're selling you" and people buy it anyway, then that's their fault.

We don't live in the middle-aged, claims can be scientifically supported or not. Side effects can be measured and reported, we don't need the FDA to "classify" stuff, especially to the point of making something illegal to sell or possess.

If someone wants to take Kratom without knowing anything about it that's their choice.

The fact is, given we have a significantly educated population and many even "citizen scientists" more than happy to do investigations (provided they won't be thrown in jail), the FDA is counter productive especially when they spread misinformation.

Re: You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

idiots like you eat tide pods

Re: You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

THIS

Re:You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

If people want that, they can do it whenever they want. No kratom needed for that.

But there is something interesting in the reports of death. I found one purely using kratom. He died due to vomit in his lungs. But more striking was the amount of deaths of kratom + ssri, some really bad interaction going on there.

And one guy with 8(!) different prescription drugs in his system. I really don't get it, why doctors do that. Even the one-on-one interactions between most of the drugs aren't mapped.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[edtice1559]

Nobody is selling the plant. They are selling capsules of powder derived from the plant.

Re:You know, if people want to....

[Anonymous Coward]

Ummmm...you need another country. Prescribing medications for lifelong treatment rather than adjusting lifestyle IS the US health system. They are even defining hypertension in such a dishonest fashion as to catch perfectly healthy people in their dragnet in order to introduce them to the spiral of inevitable early death that the hypertension medications are.

Re:Treason, Obstruction of Justice

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you been making kratom tea again?

Stupidity rules

[nospam007]

"The victims often had mixed kratom with other substances, including chemicals taken out of inhalers and found in over-the-counter cold and flu drugs."

So flu drugs and inhalers 'contributed' to their deaths as well as the child laxative used to dilute heroin.
Best to forbid everything.

People had taken up to _9_ different things and only 44 cases?
That's not science, that's anecdotes.

Re:Stupidity rules

[NettiWelho]

That's not science, that's anecdotes.

It gets even better; the whole war on drugs is completely unconstitutional.

Re:Stupidity rules

[Anonymous Coward]

So's universal healthcare, restrictions on private ownership of armaments, a standing military, and social security.

Whether or not it was actually said, the old Bush quote about the Constitution just being a piece of paper has been accurate since damned near its inception.

Re:Stupidity rules

[Khyber]

"So's universal healthcare"

No, the government is tasked with providing for the welfare of the people. Universal healthcare is clearly within the scope of that tasking.

Re:Stupidity rules

[Anonymous Coward]

Getting people laid helps with their mental welfare, so your logic suggests we should have government funded brothels that are open to everyone.

Re:Stupidity rules

[Anonymous Coward]

I came to inject my personal experience with Kratom a good decade back.

Due to an injury and a multi-month stay in the hospital for many surgeries, once out and a good way through recovery I found myself physically dependent on actual opioids, becoming unbearably sick whenever I just stopped taking them.

I found it was easier to lower my dosage by a certain percent every few days, and initially worked with my doctors to do just that.
About a month in they ended up simply cutting off my prescription while only down to 25mg/day from my original 100mg/day.

In absolute terror to feel like I did when cold stopping, I turned to a friend who somehow managed to remain prescribed a large quantity prescription that he was basically doing the same thing as I was, tapering down, but he wasn't working with his doctor for it and remained on the same dosage the full time.

This helped a lot to continue my plan, at least up until he was sent overseas for work for six months.

Not wanting to either go down the hardcore path, or the withdraw agony, it was suggested I try Kratom pills.

So here's the thing. They did work to trick the body and brain enough to not experience withdraws, so clearly there is something in the stuff that acts similar to the real thing.
But it is VERY mild. There is no high, no pain relief, no other effects.

However to get even the relief from withdraws, I had to take 6-8 giant capsules every 4 or so hours. Basically a $40 bottle a day.
I can totally see why someone would turn to shooting up instead of that crap.

These pills are like most "natural herbal" pills you see peddled, huge size "triple zero" gelcaps packed with powder. These are the kind that suck to take even one of, let alone 8 at once.
They also float, so its a bitch to swallow them with water so you don't gag and choke.
They also do quite a number on your stomach inducing cramps and all.

When they were suggested to me, the same person said it needs a larger than usual dose, aka 6-8 pills instead of what it said on the bottle. The funny part was 6 pills WAS what was suggested on the bottle.

I can't even imagine how many you would need to take at once to get any sort of recreational effects out of the things.
I'm not even sure I could physically get enough down at a time to get any more effect without throwing up.

I know people will go to some amazing extremes to get high, but damn!

Granted this is just my own experience, and I had a lot going on with my body at the time, but I find it a bit hard to believe that the Kratom itself is what caused these deaths.

Your comment about mixing it with other chemicals seems to me to be spot on.

Re:Stupidity rules

[Anonymous Coward]

You can find large doses of kratom for way cheaper than what you were paying. It just come's in a bag rather than capsules. Like $60 for 250g.

Re:Stupidity rules

[Anonymous Coward]

Go ahead and explain that argument, as the constitution blatantly directs the federal government to regulate imports and exports, secure the borders, and regulate banking, and authorizes the federal government to regulate interstate trade. Notice that, beyond yelling and fussing, the feds have done nothing about the marijuana trade inside states, except to the extent that they are regulating banks. In fact, they've pretty much let the cartel grows be the states' problems instead of continuing to bust them.

Show me the "unconstitutional" that you assert.

Re:Stupidity rules

[quantaman]

"The victims often had mixed kratom with other substances, including chemicals taken out of inhalers and found in over-the-counter cold and flu drugs."

So flu drugs and inhalers 'contributed' to their deaths as well as the child laxative used to dilute heroin.

The idea of an FDA approved drug is has an actual pharmacological effect, and the moment you have an effect you also tend to have side effects. And these side effects, even fatal ones, are documented on the medicine itself.

Herbals and other alt-medicines usually avoid side effects by being generally useless. If one is actually doing something significant it should be treated as a drug because it now has the potential to seriously harm someone if misused.

Best to forbid everything.

People had taken up to _9_ different things and only 44 cases?

44 deaths is a lot for something I've never heard of, especially when you consider that you could easily have 10x as many unreported cases.

That's not science, that's anecdotes.

It's activating opiod receptors, that's science. And what happens when you activate too many opiod receptors is also known, that's death.

Re:Stupidity rules

[Archangel Michael]

"Promote general welfare" doesn't mean "provide health insurance /healthcare ". But you can try to claim it does. It also reflects back to the previous statement in the preamble.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

The Constitution also outlaws slavery and indentured servitude. Which happens to be my view of taking of money from someone and giving it to another, under threat of force. If you think that is Liberty, then you're a great socialist. I happen to think it is evil.

Re:Stupidity rules

[sl3xd]

Ultimately, the SCOTUS decides constitutionality, not random citizens with a vision of how things would be if they were made Emperor.

Questions about the constitutionality of regulating arms has been decided by the SCOTUS several times , in some cases over a century ago:

* Presser v. Illinois (1886): The SCOTUS determined that states are able to regulate gun ownership - which is why we see state-approved firearms (ie. California's Roster of Handguns Certified for Sale )
* United States v. Miller (1939): The SCOTUS said "we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument"; specific weapons can be regulated.

Social Security is similarly declared constitutional.

Helvering v. Davis (1937): The SCOTUS determined Social Security providing the welfare of the people, and would almost certainly be used as a reason to allow universal healthcare.

Standing armies and navies aren't banned - they merely require Congress to renew authorization every two years.

Re:Stupidity rules

[Anonymous Coward]

And yet, you're cool with life and liberty being taken and completely disrespected disrupted and destroyed in the name of money and property rights all day long every day and you call that freedom.

Maybe you're like the dude in Falling Down and you're really the bad guy and the whole result of your life is destructive and wasteful and objectively awful for everyone else, but you think you're right and what you think is evil is quit truly everyone else's good because you are so focused on your own selfish worldview that you can't see past your own baby level selfishness, like every other rah rah libertarian bent over idiot.

Re:Stupidity rules

[Anonymous Coward]

You really have no business responding to this in any way, honestly. 44 deaths casually linked to a substance is literally nothing.

>The cause of death was ruled propylhexedrine toxicity

>...the only other compounds detected were therapeutic concentrations of venlafaxine,
diphenhydramine, mirtazapine and ethanol.
>...they were considered to have additive toxic central nervous system effects in the presence of mitragynine and
were therefore felt to have contributed toward the death.

Interestingly enough,
>..."“Combined with psychosocial support, these treatments are effective. Importantly, there are three drugs (buprenorphine, methadone, and naltrexone) approved by the FDA for the treatment of opioid addiction..."
Note that those are all medications pushed by big pharma.

The first report in the PDF contradicts this as well:
>It can also be used for opiate withdrawal, fever reduction, analgesia, diarrhea, coughing, and hypertension.

Insofar as deaths are concerned acetominophen is a common OTC NSAID:
>...An estimated 458 deaths due to acute liver failure. [yearly]
Aspirin:
>...For 50-year-old men, taking a full-sized, 325 mg aspirin every day to prevent heart disease and stroke carries a risk of 10.4 deaths per 100,000 men per year over and above their overall death risk.

Re:Stupidity rules

[Anonymous Coward]

And food, housing, purpose in life and a new iPhone every 6 months.

Re:Stupidity rules

[Theils Blood Boy]

Lol look at this fucking law genius. However did you and the whole rest of the internet get the time and motivation read and understood the entire constitution and every single related case and court ruling since?!?! It in it's current state it exists to fuck you and protect those with resources when it's time to fuck you. The constitution and the law in general is as useless and inaccessible to you as Elon Musk's car. I predict in the future those of you who fail to accept your deserved places in life will be used as wet food for celebrity show dogs so the sooner you start thinking of yourself as a slave the greater your chances of survival.

Re:Stupidity rules

[Theils Blood Boy]

It's bedtime in russia so Archangel Mikhail is sleep now.

Re:Stupidity rules

[Theils Blood Boy]

No no no this is silly talk. Random groups of people who learned the law off internet websites have discovered that the entire court system is illegal and the government has to pay you money if you fly the gold fringed flag of your family's proper coat of arms on your front lawn. Under international law the US government must respect your house's right to safe passage through it's waters. As the earth is 4/6th water this means that you're above prosecution unless they can trick you into appearing in a) a federal courtroom or 2) flying on an airplane in us airspace where you legally become the property of the FAA and can actually be pressed into slavery!!! This is how the FISA courts support the existence of black sites... the us government flies terrorists over the country, enslaves them, and then sends them to work in overseas prison plantations. Think about the historical implications "BLACK" sites.

Re: Stupidity rules

[Anonymous Coward]

Wickard v. Filburn, dummy.

Iâ(TM)m completely against the WOD, but to suggest it is Unconstitutional is to reveal yourself as an idiot.

Re: Stupidity rules

[Anonymous Coward]

This bullshit post reminds me how much I miss Bad Analogy Guy.

Re:Stupidity rules

[Anonymous Coward]

By that logic Nevada should have the fewest crazies per capita yet the recent mass shooting suggests otherwise.

Re:Stupidity rules

[PrimaryConsult]

Did you try Loperamide (Brand name Imodium)... it's an opioid that does not cross the blood-brain barrier (the only reason it is OTC). Off-label use for sure, but some people cut off from prescriptions have had success with it ("poor man's methodone").

Re:Stupidity rules

[fafalone]

If SCOTUS ruled that the sky was red, it wouldn't change the fact that the sky is really blue and they're just making a ruling they know is wrong because they support the law. 'Regulate interstate commerce' meaning that a federal police force can arrest you for growing a plant on your own land, exclusively for your own use, in accordance with state law, as a bona fide medical treatment approved by a doctor, is absolute unmitigated bullshit on the scale of that sky color ruling (Raich upholding precedent from Wickard). They didn't want to undermine the drug war, so made a ruling that is blatantly intellectually dishonest in its direct contradiction of objective fact.

Re:Stupidity rules

[fafalone]

You have to be careful with loperamide. 100mg then tapering lower for a week or two is fine and will stop withdrawal 90% or better; but taking 800mg at once or 200+mg/day long-term (some people have taken up to 1200mg/day--- yes, 600 pills-- for months) is associated with heart rhythm abnormalities that have resulted in a number of fatalities.

Re:Stupidity rules

[Anonymous Coward]

Get over yourself, caesar.

You do not have the right or authority to decide what is constitutional. Your opinion has no more weight than the electrons that store it.

The US constitution already tells us who has the sole and ultimate authority to determine constitutionality of law, in Article III.

The SCOTUS. The SCOTUS is the final authority in deciding if something is constitutional. Not the President, not the Congress, not any state legislature, governor, mayor, sherrif or court. Only the SCOTUS has that power.

There is exactly one way for anyone outside th aScotus to reverse a SCOTUS decision on the constitutionality of a law: amend the constitution.

Everything else is bits in the æther.

Additionally: the SCOTUS would never rule the sky is red. That’s one of the worst straw men I’ve ever seen.

Re:Stupidity rules

[Anonymous Coward]

Because STATE_X is so much better and has no mass shootings, police shootings, or children killing other children with unlocked handguns. Throw stones at Nevada, that'll fix it!

Re:Stupidity rules

[flopsquad]

The Constitution also outlaws slavery and indentured servitude. Which happens to be my view of taking of money from someone and giving it to another, under threat of force.

The state constitution of Utah outlaws polygamy, and polygamy happens to be my view of going on a pub crawl. Burglary is illegal, and burglary happens to be my view of long division. Hey words are awesome when they can mean whatever I want them to!

Re:Stupidity rules

[drinkypoo]

"Promote general welfare" doesn't mean "provide health insurance /healthcare ". But you can try to claim it does.

How doesn't it? Use small words, you seem to have trouble with big ones.

The Constitution also outlaws slavery and indentured servitude. Which happens to be my view of taking of money from someone and giving it to another, under threat of force. If you think that is Liberty, then you're a great socialist. I happen to think it is evil.

Ah yes, the old "taxation is slavery" crowd. I bet you call yourself a Christian too, as little as you want to help people.

Your lifestyle is predicated upon the suffering of others. It is only right that you should pay into the system to offset that suffering.

Re:Stupidity rules

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes it does. It absolutely means that it's not only within the constitutional power of government to provide healthcare, it's the constitutional duty of the federal government to provide healthcare.

If you're one of the "taxes are slavery" fools, there's no saving you. Go find a deserted island to die on.

Re:Stupidity rules

[kick6]

Ultimately the wealthy who can afford lawyers long enough to GET to the supreme court decide justice. Translation: there's no justice.

Re:Stupidity rules

[Immerman]

A trick I was recently introduced to for swallowing pills more easily: Tilt your head down to look at the floor as you swallow. Sounded ridiculous, but worked wonderfully.

I suppose if you think about it, that's how we evolved to drink - out of a river or pond. Your tongue automatically does all the work to force water up and into your throat, and anything else gets carried along for the ride. And floating pills would end up being first down the gullet, I would think.

Re:Stupidity rules

[sl3xd]

Twenty years ago, I heard a guy say something that stuck with me.

Courts are about law. Justice has nothing to do with it.

Re:Stupidity rules

[Biogoly]

You swallow Kratom? I was under the impression that it was mostly smoked? This could definitely effect levels of euphoria. That being said, there can be a vast difference in drug metabolism between individuals.

Re: Stupidity rules

[Anonymous Coward]

Kratom is essentially a powdered leaf, not a refined chemical. You need to take a relatively large amount to gain any benefit, more than will fit in a few gelatin caps. But you can buy Kratom in bulk, it would probably cost you a buck or two a day tops.

Re:Stupidity rules

[david_thornley]

"Universal health care", "social security" - Congress has explicit authority to tax and spend for the common defense and general welfare. Congressional laws on spending money are almost always constitutional. Some people like to pretend that the General Welfare is restricted in some way, but that's not what the Constitution said.

"restrictions on private ownership of armaments" - Whether the Second covers all armaments is debatable, but as I read it the ban on buying new automatic weapons is unconstitutional.

"standing military" - Where does it say that? Congress has explicit authority to maintain an army and a navy, with the restriction that no appropriations bill for the Army can be for more than two years. Congress also has authority to tax and spend for the Common Defense.

"war on drugs" - I find this to be really dubious, Constitutionally. We had a frippin' amendment to ban alcohol. The Feds can certainly finance anti-drug actions, including those of the states, and can regulate interstate commerce of drugs, but I don't see that the Federal Government has any authority to make drugs grown in one state and consumed there which are legal by state law illegal.

Re:Stupidity rules

[david_thornley]

"Promote general welfare" doesn't mean "provide health insurance /healthcare "

No, "Promote general welfare" is far more general. However, it's basically Congress's decision as to what constitutes General Welfare, in the absence of a more specific definition in the Constitution.

The Constitution also outlaws slavery and indentured servitude. Which happens to be my view of taking of money from someone and giving it to another, under threat of force. If you think that is Liberty, then you're a great socialist. I happen to think it is evil.

That definition applies to all taxes, since their use is to give money to people under some circumstance or another. Most people of all sorts of political and economic viewpoints believe that taxes are necessary to run a country. (There's a tremendous amount of debate on the details.) You don't have to be a socialist to believe in taxation and giving money to people. (Otto von Bismarck was not a socialist, for example.)

Slavery and indentured servitude are cases where a master tells a slave or indentured servant what to do, and legally has to be obeyed. My boss can tell me what to do, and I can either do that or quit. Therefore, I'm neither a slave nor an indentured servant. Taking some of your money isn't slavery, since there's no actual legal requirement for you to make money. You want to earn money, you're participating in the system, and the system has to be financially supported.

Re:Stupidity rules

[Archangel Michael]

master tells a slave or indentured servant what to do

Liberty is where a man is his own master.

Stop paying your income taxes (one of the greatest evils IMHO), and see who your master really is. The master demands the product of your labor, allowing you to keep a portion. That sounds a LOT like slavery.

Re:Stupidity rules

[Anonymous Coward]

The list of non-opioid prescription drugs that activate opioid receptors are enormous.

How about you learn some actual science before spouting off your bullshit?

44 deaths is a lot for something I've never heard of

Who the fuck are you, besides an ignorant twatwaffle?

numbnuts

The FDA has zero credibility

[Anonymous Coward]

They said the same thing about cannabis and it is *still* a Schedule 1 drug. Does anyone actually believe the FDA when they declare a useful plant to have no medicinal value?

Re:The FDA has zero credibility

[fredrated]

No?

Re:The FDA has zero credibility

[xvan]

On the other hand, Cocaine can be used for experimentation as a scheduled 2 drug.
The reason marijuana is not type 2 is that the FDA doesn't admit valid use case for marijuana for wich is not already covered by another superior drug. Or maybe it's bigotry and war on drugs.

Re:The FDA has zero credibility

[sjames]

Definitely the war on drugs. Since doctors DO prescribe marijuana and it is known to have beneficial effects, the DEA (not doctors) claiming it has no recognized medical use is complete BS.

Re:The FDA has zero credibility

[h4ck7h3p14n37]

Given Jeff Session's opinion on the matter, we may just get lucky and have Congress take action to re/de-schedule it.

Re:The FDA has zero credibility

[jonwil]

Anyone in congress who even mentions support for such an idea (at least anyone who actually matters enough that they could possibly get a bill going) will get a nice fat campaign donation cheque from the lobby group representing the drug companies and that will be the end of that.

The drug companies know that if medical cannabis becomes properly legal (rather than the grey area where its legal at state level in many states but remains 100% illegal at the federal level) it will hurt their bottom line as more patients use cannabis instead of the drugs owned and controlled by "big pharma" and will do whatever it takes to ensure that doesn't happen.

Re:The FDA has zero credibility

[bluefoxlucid]

I'm already backing the full legalization of discretionary cannabis use: it's a harmless intoxicant--like khat (cathinone), salvia divinorum (salvinorin A), and a few others--and we're wasting resources and destroying lives with our current policies. These such things should just be legal--at least for those age 21 and up (potentially 18 and up).

My opponent is against legalization.

Re:The FDA has zero credibility

[bluefoxlucid]

Oh, hm. NORML scorecard for Elijah is actually B, for support of Medical Marijuana; but he doesn't seem to support full legalization for adults. Interesting... his position has changed over the last few years; he was listed as against medical marijuana a while back.

Re:The FDA has zero credibility

[david_thornley]

Anyone opposing marijuana legalization also might get contribution checks from illegal drug dealers. Legalizing the stuff would cut down on their business hard.

Re:The FDA has zero credibility

[Anonymous Coward]

It is used in hospital settings.

I had a deviated septum that was causing bad headaches and they gave me two drugs during the surgery: fentanyl and cocaine. This was in a navy hospital.

Other fun facts are that PCP(angel dust) and meth are both schedule II drugs and meth is still prescribed today, but FDA put marijuana on schedule 1?

The FDA are a pack of numbnuts that answer only to big pharma.

First the TSA

[Anonymous Coward]

A few years ago, the TSA declared that ice is a liquid, baffling materials scientists everywhere.

Re:First the TSA

[Anonymous Coward]

A few years ago, the TSA declared that ice is a liquid, baffling materials scientists everywhere.

At least, ice at room temperature (and typical pressures on board a plane) is a liquid...
On the other hand, ice might sublimate to a gas if the plane is deliberately depressurized (due to the temperature being below 0deg C), so it isn't really a liquid in that case...

Learning

[markdavis]

Learn something new every day. Never even heard of "kratom" until today.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

"is a tropical evergreen tree in the coffee family (Rubiaceae) native to Southeast Asia in the Indochina and Malaysia phytochoria (botanical regions). M. speciosa is indigenous to Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia, Myanmar, and Papua New Guinea, where it has been used in traditional medicine since at least the 19th century. Kratom has some opioid- and stimulant-like properties."

Re:Learning

[Anonymous Coward]

A bit more general info:

Here (in Thailand) it's probably used in a similar way to the coca leaf in South America. It's a traditional pick-me-up used by manual labourers to get them through the day.

From personal experience, when eaten it gives an intensely bitter taste, with a raw buzzy stimulating feeling akin to a couple of cups of strong coffee together, which diminishes over a couple of hours.

I've seen taxi drivers wash down a couple of leaves with a Red Bull equivalent and then drive. I'd imagine that encourages erratic driving and is possibly the source of the 'all lorry drivers are on meth' accusations. And my nephews brew up some concoction of kratom and cough mixture, so I guess that's the stimulant/depressant combination that appeals to some. I suppose this is where it goes from "traditional use" to abuse.

Over here it's illegal, and people are regularly arrested for transporting bales of 10s of kilos of the stuff. But then, it grows like weeds by the roadside. On it's own, it's one of natures medicines and no big deal to most users (though I feel the same way about cannabis). Like any mind-altering substance, it's abused to extremes by some.

It's time...

[Anonymous Coward]

No more Kratom. It's time for all the smart little kiddies to go back to chewing tide pods again.

Government For Sale

[CanHasDIY]

I'm just going to leave this here...

http://www.pogo.org/our-work/r...

Re:Government For Sale

[dbreeze]

"The love of money is the root of all evil."

Re:Government For Sale

[Anonymous Coward]

Huge off-topic blast from the past, for a second there I thought the link was to pogo.com.
Had alot of late-nights playing euchre with the canucks and the kiwis, very fun memories from when the internet(and I) was young.

This is to be expected

[rsilvergun]

The Republicans have taken a hard-line stance on any drug with mind altering affects, even vary mild ones. If it's not tobacco or booze they've been against it. The corporate Dems (Chuck Schumer, Joe Manchin, Feinstein, etc) are the same. Mostly bought off by big Pharma & private prison industries. Here's hoping somebody at least primaries Feinstein.

Re: This is to be expected

[Anonymous Coward]

> Here's hoping somebody at least primaries Feinstein

Yeah, not just for this but everything else she's ever done!!

I am liberal Californian and she doesn't represent me!

Re:This is to be expected

[Anonymous Coward]

Me like some drugs with mind altering "affects"

So.. it's officially just "medicine" now?

[Anonymous Coward]

Isn't there a saying that goes something like "alternative medicine that works, we just call medicine"? Prescription opioids is a thing. Kratom is stated to affect the brain like opioids do, so... How can they at the same time claim it's an opioid and that it is not effective for any medical use?

Caveat: I never heard of kratom until today, and I only read the summary. That saying just popped to mind even as I read the title itself. "alt-medicine declared an opioid".

Re:So.. it's officially just "medicine" now?

[sl3xd]

How can they at the same time claim it's an opioid and that it is not effective for any medical use

Let's think of "sweeteners" for a moment. A "sweetener" is anything that activates the "sweet" receptors on the tongue. Sugars are the sweeteners our bodies really care about. Some sugars are sweeter than others. There are also compounds which are thousands of times sweeter than sugar. Lead diacetate is a sweetener known in antiquity, and is kinda... bad.

Opioids are defined in the same way: They activate opioid receptors. The pituitary gland creates opioids (which we call "endorphins" -- a contraction of endogenous and morphine). Much like sweeteners, there are compounds from many other sources which are far more powerful than natural endorphins.

So that's how they can classify it as an opioid: it binds to or activates the opioid receptor.

Cannabinoids, and nicotinoids are classified similarly.

To sell a food or drug in the US, it has to meet standards of safety and purity. The onus falls on the seller to prove it's safe and/or effective. TFA states there have been no studies about the safety or effectiveness of Kratom.

Proving any opioid is safe without a prescription will no doubt be very difficult to do. Opioids in particular have a long, dark history in "patent medicines" - over the counter "medicine" which were neither effective or safe -- and one of the primary reasons the FDA was created by Congress.

Re:So.. it's officially just "medicine" now?

[Anonymous Coward]

To run with the sweeteners notion, it seems to me that the original quote would then go something like "this is a sweetener, but has no effective use for sweetening".

Additional information (e.g. "but also destroys your liver at any dosage that would make it have pain relieving effect") would obviously make a difference, but if I was really that interested in the thing I would have done research on it rather than go by the summary.

I didn't address the legality of what it takes to sell something as medicine, because it goes without saying that to be sold as medicine takes a lot more than to "have medicinal use". At least in colloquial speech. It was the definition of "alternative medicine" along with the acknowledgement that it has the same effect as controlled medicinal substances, I reacted to. The tone was meant to be flippant, so let's not dive too deep.

Not Helping Further Public Health

[LeftCoastThinker]

The first part of the finding, that Kratom acts similarly to an opioid, is a reasonable, scientific discovery. The next step, stating that it is not useful in treating any medical conditions, is complete bullshit. From WebMD: "Advocates say the herb kratom offers relief from pain, depression, and anxiety. Scientists say it may hold the key to treating chronic pain and may even be a tool to combat addiction to opioid medications." https://www.webmd.com/mental-h...

The FDA has no damn clue if Kratom is medicinally useful. If the FDA were reasonably interested in promoting the general health and welfare of the population, the next step would be to temporarily ban Kratom while THEY perform historic investigation, investigate anecdotal accounts of medicinal properties, and then if warranted perform voluntary double blind clinical trials to validate or refute the historical and anecdotal evidence. I have never heard of this herb, let alone taken it, but many naturally occurring plant components have medicinal properties.

All drugs have side effects, all drugs can be dangerous. To pull a medicinal herb without any plans to properly study it while giving blanket statements condemning its use is dishonest and fuels the antivaxers and alternative medicine movements that have been steadily growing in the US.

Re:Not Helping Further Public Health

[Anonymous Coward]

The next step, stating that it is not useful in treating any medical conditions, is complete bullshit.

That is not what he said. He said there is no (scientific) evidence - which is true.

There is no evidence to indicate that kratom is safe or effective for any medical use

It is a very minimal, conservative statement. The rest is you filling in your bias.

Re:Not Helping Further Public Health

[TheRealMindChild]

Drugs that directly make you feel good are always classified as "not useful in treating any medical conditions"

Re:Not Helping Further Public Health

[LeftCoastThinker]

Except for alcohol (a glass of wine a day demonstrably reduces your chances of heart disease and stroke)?

More recently there have been studies that show schizophrenics may have been self medicating with nicotine for generations, and it actually helps? http://www.schizophrenia.com/n...

Pot (THC) is also still good for glaucoma, anorexia and medication related nausea and to facilitate weight gain.

Re: Not Helping Further Public Health

[Anonymous Coward]

Advocates say Kraton cures cancer too.

Re:Not Helping Further Public Health

[Anonymous Coward]

Somebody please silence this poster - he is making too much sense. This sort of thinking is out with American ideals. God save the children.

Re: Not Helping Further Public Health

[Anonymous Coward]

To be fair to comparative things idiots say about stuff curing cancer, kratom is dirt cheap and is just dried vegetable matter. So it's not exactly super dangerous to anyone's wallet or the health of the vast majority of people.

Kratom has mild effects and 3-5g ingested orally is about the same as a few shots of espresso, and the bad reactions seem to be about as frequent and serious as bad reactions to caffeine.

Not that I'm excusing it, but it's really one of the very lesser deals to worry about in that arena, If you're concerned, there are much bigger whales to fry than the kratom sardine.

Re:Not Helping Further Public Health

[sl3xd]

The FDA has no damn clue if Kratom is medicinally useful.

That's exactly the problem. The FDA was given power to ban claims without proof of therapeutic effect.

, the next step would be to temporarily ban Kratom while THEY perform historic investigation

The FDA tried to enact a temporary ban. People complained, petitioned congress, etc.

The FDA is not authorized to spend a dime of taxpayer money to prove a drug is safe or effective; their duty is to prevent potentially dangerous or addictive substances from being sold until proven safe. The prospective seller is the one who has to foot the bill to prove it's safe and effective.

many naturally occurring plant components have medicinal properties.

You're not wrong. The problem is focus blindness, like this picture from Finding Nemo.

The only safe assumption to make about an unknown plant is that it will do some seriously bad shit to you until proven otherwise -- which is exactly what the FDA is doing.

That's doubly true with any plant that binds to opioid receptors.

Re:Not Helping Further Public Health

[MobyDisk]

You are misunderstanding what the FDA is saying.

The FDA has no damn clue if Kratom is medicinally useful.

Agreed. And the FDA seems to be saying that too. Read on...

The next step, stating that it is not useful in treating any medical conditions, is complete bullshit.

They did not say that.

They said:

Kratom should not be used to treat medical conditions, nor should it be used as an alternative to prescription opioids. There is no evidence to indicate that kratom is safe or effective for any medical use.

So they are merely saying that thereis no proof yet that this drug is safe or effective.

the next step would be to temporarily ban Kratom while THEY perform historic investigation...

This is a common misconception. The FDA does not do such investigations. The FDA reviews claims and evidence provided by others and make decisions based on it.

To pull a medicinal herb without any plans to properly study it

The FDA did not "pull" the herb. They merely stated two scientifically-backed statements: That it acts like an opioid, and that there is not yet evidence it cures any disease. If someone wants to sell this, then they need to do that research and submit it to the FDA.

Re:Not Helping Further Public Health

[Michael Woodhams]

I agree with what you are saying here, but there is a big gap in the current system. When a potentially useful drug is patented by a pharma company, that company has an incentive to do the drug trials. When a potentially useful drug is for some reason not patentable (as in this case) there is nobody to pay for trials. Stage I and stage II trials can probably get done on academic grants, but it would be hard to fund a stage III trial like that.

I am not a pharmaceutical researcher or funder, I am happy to accept correction from more knowledgeable people.

Re:Not Helping Further Public Health

[PrimaryConsult]

Except the best disease it seems to be useful for is opiod addiction. The thing everyone in politics claims to want to address without actually addressing. And which is caused by the FDA in the first place. Prescription pain pills are cut off while people are addicted, and the cheapest / easiest thing to get their hands on is fucking Heroin, because getting Oxy / Vicodin on the black market is more expensive. Why were they on those opiods in the first place? Because Acetaminophen, Asprin, Ibuprofen are not strong enough, cannabis might be helpful but it is banned.

So now they're hooked on something, they find this Kratom which might help, and now that's banned too. People were using Imodium to get off their addictions, so some states started to limit how many can be sold to one person at a time. Can't be using it for anything other than diarrhea, no matter how impossible it is to get high from.

The only conclusion that can be drawn here is that the epidemic of opioid addiction is completely intentional.

Re:Not Helping Further Public Health

[Anonymous Coward]

The type of pharmaceutical we're talking about is a "natural product." Finding useful compounds in the natural world is the foundation of the pharmaceutical industry (i.e. penicillin, aspirin).

The government (through the NIH) does fund research into kratom. Having the FDA fund pharma research leads to a lot of conflicts of interest. I'm sure pharma companies are looking at it as well, they'll look at anything promising.

The use of natural products can be patented, there's a patent around use of kratom for opioid addiction.

Re:Not Helping Further Public Health

[drinkypoo]

You are misunderstanding what the FDA is saying.

He is not.

The next step, stating that it is not useful in treating any medical conditions, is complete bullshit.

They did not say that.
They said:
Kratom should not be used to treat medical conditions, nor should it be used as an alternative to prescription opioids. There is no evidence to indicate that kratom is safe or effective for any medical use.

When you boil the two statements down, the same thing is left in the bottom of the kettle. Also, their statement is an outright lie. There is evidence that kratom is effective for medical use. Meanwhile, many prescription medications approved by the FDA aren't safe. The side effects are worse than the illness they "cure".

the next step would be to temporarily ban Kratom while THEY perform historic investigation...

This is a common misconception. The FDA does not do such investigations. The FDA reviews claims and evidence provided by others and make decisions based on it.

And that's why the FDA is shit. It's only negative. It doesn't do anything positive.

To pull a medicinal herb without any plans to properly study it

The FDA did not "pull" the herb. They merely stated two scientifically-backed statements: That it acts like an opioid, and that there is not yet evidence it cures any disease. If someone wants to sell this, then they need to do that research and submit it to the FDA.

Only one of those statements is scientifically backed. The FDA says precisely the same thing about cannabis. They claim that "there are no FDA-approved studies" means the same thing is "there is no evidence" but it does not. Here you are, repeating their lies, which makes you a useful idiot at best.

Re:Not Helping Further Public Health

[drinkypoo]

I agree with what you are saying here, but there is a big gap in the current system.

The "big gap" comes in the form of NIH. Other countries do perform these kind of studies, but we won't accept the results of any study not performed in the USA because we're better than everyone else in the world and none of them have anything to say that we would be interested in. At least, that's how the FDA operates.

Re:Not Helping Further Public Health

[e3m4n]

I find it interesting they say 'works similar to opiods'.... by that do they mean it triggers a dopamine reaction? If so why the hell is sugar and HFCS still legal? They also do it. In fact this known sugar high is exactly why the fucking straws at mcdonalds are so large you could almost suck a marble through them. They want to speed up the absorbtion of sugar in the sodas so you associate this sugar high with their stores.

Re: Not Helping Further Public Health

[Immerman]

Might be worth reconsidering your position of " just dried vegetable matter. So it's not exactly super dangerous to...the health of the vast majority of people". There's an awful lot of plants that are extremely dangerous to consume. Tobacco will only kill you with prolonged, or very high, exposure. Deadly nightshade is considerably faster and more lethal, and far from the most dangerous. And there's thousands of other examples (pro tip castor bean tea is NOT a suitable replacement for castor oil). You may have noticed that plants can't run away when under attack, so instead they defend themselves with unpleasant tastes, spikes, and a wide range of poisons.

Re:Not Helping Further Public Health

[Immerman]

Probably "binds to opioid receptors". Of course, binding to them doesn't necessarily translate to "activates them in the normal manner". Lots of pharmaceutical drugs work precisely by binding to different chemical receptors while failing to activate them.

Re:Not Helping Further Public Health

[LeftCoastThinker]

Their statement "There is no evidence to indicate that kratom is safe or effective for any medical use." is 100% a lie.

The actual true statement would be: "There is no FDA backed/approved studies to indicate that kratom is safe or effective for any medical use." Two very different things, as the FDA does not have exclusive rights to objective reality.

Re:Not Helping Further Public Health

[LeftCoastThinker]

The root problem though is this is not a drug, this is a plant. Phara companies arent interested in plants because they can't patent naturally occurring compounds. This plant could turn out to be a 100% safe and effective cure for opoid addiction, but without someone to do the research, the FDA has just shafted thousands of addicts.

This is obviously speculation, but it is a real problem with the FDA and why growing numbers of Americans are ready to see the agency gutted and totally re-organized with a mandate to improve the health, quality of life and life expectancy of Americans, rather than churning out approvals for dangerous drugs that bring in the ever critical FDA funding.

Re:Not Helping Further Public Health

[LeftCoastThinker]

That should change, at least to be updated with a list of countries whom we have found to be rigorous and accurate with their trials (probably most of Western Europe, Australia, etc.) and there should be an automatic investigation triggered in the US if ANY study found medicinal value in a naturally occurring substance. This is actually what people want their tax dollars funding...

Re:Not Helping Further Public Health

[MobyDisk]

Except the best disease it seems to be useful for is opiod addiction

Read the article. The entire point of the FDA statement is because there is no evidence that it is useful for opioid addiction. They just linked to a bunch of studies showing that. There are better alternatives, and they are often free.

they find this Kratom which might help, and now that's banned too/quote>
The FDA did not ban Kratom.

Re:Not Helping Further Public Health

[MobyDisk]

Your entire post is nothing but an ad-hominem attack on the FDA. The bottom line is that they made a claim, and cited tons of articles backing-up the claim. I'm sorry that you prefer to follow the word on the street instead of science.

There is evidence that kratom is effective for medical use.

So you claim. All I see is an article citing studies to the contrary.

Only one of those statements is scientifically backed

Read the article. They have citations for the entire thing.

The FDA says precisely the same thing about cannabis.

No they do not. Even if they did your statement is irrelevant, since this is a scientific article about Kratom not Cannabis.

And that's why the FDA is shit. It's only negative. It doesn't do anything positive.

Keeping dangerous drugs off the street is positive. Keeping bad medical devices out of doctors offices and hospitals is positive. Complaining that congress didn't give the FDA authority or money to invent new drugs is a lame criticism.

Re:Not Helping Further Public Health

[MobyDisk]

The actual true statement would be: "There is no FDA backed/approved studies to indicate that kratom is safe or effective for any medical use." Two very different things, as the FDA does not have exclusive rights to objective reality.

The FDA does not only look at "FDA backed/approved" studies. Heck, the FDA doesn't even "approve" studies. That isn't even what they do.

Re:Not Helping Further Public Health

[sl3xd]

Arguing that a substance can’t be a drug because it’s a plant is disingenuous.

Many of the more popular recreational drugs are plants.

Cannabis
Coca
Tobacco
Peyote
Opium

Some require a bit of cooking - tea, coffee.
Others require a bit of solvent extraction from the plant – cocaine being a prime example.

An Opioid is just a substance that triggers the brain’s opioid receptors. So if this herb triggers the same receptors, yes, it’s every bit as much an opioid as the latex from the flower of an opium poppy.

Coca leaves are illegal in the US - and has been for generations. Banning plants isn’t a new idea at all; the ancient story of the Garden of Eden starts with the banning of a fruit.

I don’t see unregulated opium as giving the user life, liberty, or the pursuit of happiness. I see the opposite: unregulated opium leads to slavery, misery, and death.

Re:Not Helping Further Public Health

[drinkypoo]

So you claim. All I see is an article citing studies to the contrary.

That's because you're willfully ignorant.

The FDA says precisely the same thing about cannabis.

No they do not.

Yes, yes they do. A Schedule I drug is one which is considered to have no medical benefit. You don't even know what the claims are! What makes you think you can make a contribution to the discussion? The FDA backs up the DEA here, and vice versa, so there is no conflict there either.

Even if they did your statement is irrelevant, since this is a scientific article about Kratom not Cannabis.

My statement is relevant because it establishes poor faith on the part of the federal government when it comes to the characterization of chemical compounds, including the FDA. The FDA is an ideal expression of greed and arrogance. Any study which wasn't done precisely by their guidelines is considered to be completely invalid, even if it is superior to a typical FDA-approved study overall. If it was Not Invented Here, then it's "no evidence". That's bunkum.

Keeping dangerous drugs off the street is positive. Keeping bad medical devices out of doctors offices and hospitals is positive. Complaining that congress didn't give the FDA authority or money to invent new drugs is a lame criticism.

Preventing bad things isn't positive, it's just avoiding bad things. The FDA can only smite, it cannot reward nor can it further science, only retard it. I think that's dumb. Since the FDA is being wielded as a weapon by Big Pharma, it's not just stupid but actively harmful.

The federal government does this kind of thing all the time. There always was evidence that milk from cows treated with BGH/rBST is inferior to milk from other cows, for example; it increases udder infections which is known to increase the pus content of milk by a significant percentage. But milk producers who labeled their milk as non-BGH were forced by the USDA to also carry a disclaimer stating that there was no difference between the two, which is an outright lie that they knew was a lie. Essentially the same force is at work here. They know that there is evidence that Kratom has medical benefits, but they are stating otherwise. This is a fraud perpetuated against The People, and you are making yourself a party to it by claiming otherwise.

Re:Not Helping Further Public Health

[drinkypoo]

That should change,

Many things should change, but both parties are too addicted to Big Pharma's campaign contributions (side effects may include treason) to even think about it.

Re:Not Helping Further Public Health

[MobyDisk]

That's because you're willfully ignorant [scientificamerican.com].

A citation, thank you! Now read it - it completely agrees with what the FDA said. The FDA says that Kratom does not cure any disease, and that it is not the best drug for getting people off of Opioids. The SciAm article you linked to, which is over 4 years old merely BTW, says that there is potential for using it to get people off Opiods.

Yes, yes they do. A Schedule I drug...

That's the DEA, not the FDA. Wrong organization. :-/

any study which wasn't done precisely by their guidelines is considered to be completely invalid, even if it is superior to a typical FDA-approved study overall. If it was Not Invented Here, then it's "no evidence". That's bunkum.

That's not how the FDA works. The term "FDA approved" doesn't apply to studies, it applies to medical device claims and pharmaceutical claims. "Claims" are statements about how a device or a drug works. The FDA looks at studies done by all kinds of organizations, from commercial companies to foreign universities.

Preventing bad things isn't positive

Now you are arguing just for the sake of arguing.

The federal government does this kind of thing all the time. There always was evidence that milk from cows treated with BGH/rBST is inferior to ...

Hold up here. First you complain that the FDA's job is just to ban things, but now you are complaining that they didn't ban something. Apparently, all you want to do is complain when the science doesn't agree with your opinion. Trust me dude, the FDA does more than just read SciAm. If you really want to debate the FDAs conclusions on Kratom, stop complaining about congress, the DEA, the FDA, the USDA, and citing pop science articles. There's probably real valid discussion here, but nothing you have posted here in any way refutes the FDAs evidence.

Let's bring this back to the topic:

There's a limited amount of research on this drug. Maybe in the future it will be a safer alternative to Methadone for getting people off Opioids. But today, it is not. And people are lying about it, with some claiming it is a magical cure-all for pain, and others using it in really high dosages as a Methadone alternative. This kind of fraudulent and unsafe behavior is why the FDA made this statement. You pointed out that once something is schedule 1, that federal research money into it is limited. So hopefully the DEA won't do that, or if they do, maybe congress will change their funding rules. Same thing happened with marijuana and we lost decades of valid pain research. I personally know 2 people on medical cannabis for pain (one for back pain, another for cancer.) So I get your beef with the DEA. But none of this has to do with the very modest statement that the FDA made, which is completely solid: Kratom acts like an Opioid, and we don't have any current medically-proven use for it. That's all they said.

Re:Not Helping Further Public Health

[MobyDisk]

FYI: I just came across an article on SoylentNews, that says NIH research is key to new drug development. It sounds like that is who you should petition to study Kratom.

Science or Politics?

[Anonymous Coward]

At this point, I sincerely doubt the FDA has done the requisite science to make this statement.

Under Trump, I'm afraid morons and idiots have been put in charge, and they seem to think 'science' is something a committee of idiots can vote on and make it science.

The reality is, these agencies have no credibility under Trump, because he has systematically put people who have either no fucking qualifications in charge, or who have pretty much established themselves as not believing in the things that agency does.

I know nothing about this substance, but I give no credibility from the FDA to decree this is an opiod, because I simply do not believe they have done this to a level of rigor which is actually scientific, evidence-based, and true.

This smacks of the same bullshit arguments which caused pot to be declared a 'narcotic' -- purely political and puritanical, and utterly divorced from actual fucking science.

Dr. Scott Gottlieb has no credibility, he's ideology driven not science driven, and he's full of shit. Like every other Trump appointee, he's unqualified for the job.

Gottlieb wrote another editorial in the Wall Street Journal arguing that patients who received Medicaid had worse outcomes, including death, with conditions like head and neck cancer than patients who had no insurance coverage at all.[43] Critics said that his article was based on "a classic misunderstanding: confusing correlation for causation", a limitation explicitly mentioned in all the papers he cited.

He's a political appointee, and he's utterly lacking in qualifications, or respect from the medical community.

The Evil FDA is a Big Pharma Monopoly Mill

[Anonymous Coward]

It destroys competition and keeps life-saving therapies off the market to protect the pharmaceutical industry, which is just as (if not more) dangerous than narcotics.

And yet you can still buy and grow opium poppy.

[hey!]

The exact same plant our military is attempting to eradicate in Afghanistan. It's just technically illegal to harvest and store "opium poppy straw", but if you harvest and milk seed pods for opium tea nobody is going to stop you; the DEA literally doesn't want to know because then it's got to crack down on gardeners. Or if you don't have a garden you can buy the dried seed pods at the florist for flower arrangements, and when you're done with them make your opium tea from them.

I'm not saying there's nothing to be done on the supply end, but even if you stopped all the heroin coming into the country and outlawed the "garden" poppy, addicts would just turn to synthetic opioids, some of which can be synthesized from innocuous precursors. The primary fight has to be prevention and treatment of addiction.

Re:And yet you can still buy and grow opium poppy.

[bill_mcgonigle]

The exact same plant our military is attempting to eradicate in Afghanistan.

Actually they're guarding the fields and helping the warlords traffic it. "Economic stability".

But, yeah, they should ban poppy seeds if they're thinking about banning kratom.

What the devil are you on about?

[rsilvergun]

are you suggesting Kratom is killing folks, because it's not. The FDA says that the deaths were caused by mixing Kratom with other substances, but don't really go into details and their own data seems to prove otherwise.

This is more shitting on poor people and another extension of our racist drug policy. The goal is to fill the private prisons (which are now a convenient source of slave labor that _you_ compete with) while allowing roundabout institutionalized racism and segregation. There is literally nothing good about this.

Re:What the devil are you on about?

[ChrisMaple]

The age of "racist drug policy" is long gone; the urge to ban substances is based on authoritarianism and dogooderism. Accusing people of racism where none exists weakens your case and makes you look like a fool.

It gets worse. Your tying race to poverty reveals that you have racist beliefs.

Re:What the devil are you on about?

[flopsquad]

It gets worse. Your tying race to poverty reveals that you have racist beliefs.

No, but saying that implies that you either (a) don't understand Correlation != Causation, or (b) are willing to forget that you know (a) for long enough to make a fallacious racism claim.

Re:What the devil are you on about?

[drinkypoo]

The age of "racist drug policy" is long gone;

False.

the urge to ban substances is based on authoritarianism and dogooderism.

And it disproportionately targets blacks and other minorities (but especially blacks.)

Accusing people of racism where none exists weakens your case and makes you look like a fool.

Pretending racism doesn't exist where it totally does exist weakens your case and makes you look like a white supremacist.

Re:What the devil are you on about?

[edtice1559]

The first part of this post makes a lot of sense and deserves the +5. The second portion needs a -1. No idea how one would moderate that. Guess it depends on who has points. The prison industrial complex certainly isn't racist. They don't care who is filling a bed as long as they get paid. On the other hand, you only have to look out the window to see that our long history or racism in this country is still having a profound effect.

Re: What the devil are you on about?

[Anonymous Coward]

The prisons may not care what color skin their cheap labor has, but that doesnâ(TM)t mean cops are going to start rounding up white college kids for the roaches in their ashtrays.

Re:What the devil are you on about?

[Anonymous Coward]

I fixed that for you:

are you suggesting Kratom is killing folks, because it's not [weird hippie used as source]. The FDA says that the deaths were caused by mixing Kratom with other substances, but don't really go into details and their own data [radical left-wing source] seems to prove otherwise.

  This is more shitting on poor people and another extension of our racist drug policy. The goal is to fill the private prisons (which are now a convenient source of slave labor [conspiracy site as source] that _you_ compete with) while allowing roundabout institutionalized racism and segregation [no source]. There is literally nothing good about this.

Re:Treason, Obstruction of Justice

[Anonymous Coward]

I award you no rubles. You are a disappoint troll.

You know what's not an opioid?

[WillAffleckUW]

MJ. Seriously, it's not an opioid, but is very effective in pain management and not being addictive.

But don't overdo it or you shouldn't drive.

Problem is, pharmaceutical companies don't get rich off of this, so the FDA persists in the myth that it's Schedule 1.

It's "odd"...

[MetricT]

...how much time our government spends worrying about plants that haven't killed anything other than corporate profits, and how very little time they spend worrying about an opioid epidemic which was largely created by pharmaceutical companies.

In Other News...

[Anonymous Coward]

"Bowing from pressure from Big Pharama, the FDA outlawed yet another useful drug that is an excellent alternative to proprietary overpriced expensive drugs."

...and sugar / HCFS?

[filesiteguy]

when will the FDA protect us against those drugs?

Re:...and sugar / HCFS?

[Anonymous Coward]

when will the FDA protect us against those drugs?

Well one i'd like to avocate for is getting the sugar out of most breakfast cereals. Seriously, if people want like 10g of sugar they can get a teaspoon.

For that matter, I'd also like to see some kind of fresh ice green tea sans anything available all over. Japan has fancy machines and such for coffee apparently. I'd be unsurprised if they had tea as well. This can't be that hard. Maybe I need to invent a keurig with a chiller. Hmm, you could probably integrate one into the door of a side by side fridge. Pop in a coffee cartridge and get hot coffee. Pop in a tea cartridge and get hot or cold tea, by virtue of filling it with ice first. Bonus, is you would already have a water supply.

None of the last bit has anything to do with the FDA. I'm just lazy and am more likely to drink something healthy if it dead simple. The closest you can do now is to use the keurig to brew a cup of tea (or just toss in a bag in the hot water), then have a larger cup of ice you pour the tea over.

Re:...and sugar / HCFS?

[Anonymous Coward]

When they stop getting kickbacks from the pharma companies who charge $500 for a months supply of insulin.

Their cases are all mostly flawed

[ZosX]

Many are people that toxicology reports stated had multiple drugs within their bloodstream. The cases in sweden were laced with a synthetic opiate too. In one case, one person died of a fucking gun shot wound but somehow ended up on their report until they redacted it!

But hey, let's just take their word for it.....

I know you are but what am I

[rsilvergun]

is what I'm hearing. Your arguments don't hold up to math. Even accounting for all control factors (income, location, family status, etc) blacks are 2-3 times more likely to be arrested for drug violations and get harsher sentences. This is a statistical fact you can prove for yourself with a few minutes on google. If we can't acknowledge facts, even when they make us uncomfortable, well, I don't know what to do. I really don't. But you're not going to see legalized drugs unless we attack the underlining reasons people support keeping them illegal. Remember, it takes a significant amount of political will to maintain our drug policy, and we need to be firing on all cylinders if we want to change it.

Re:I know you are but what am I

[Anonymous Coward]

"blacks are 2-3 times more likely to be arrested for drug violations and get harsher sentences."

Possibly because blacks represent 12% of the population but are responsible for 40% of all crime? Seeing how you're quoting statistics.

Re:I know you are but what am I

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey look! A Racist! ^^^^^^^^^^

Your post proves the point, by the way. Racism is very much alive and well, racist scum like you making bullshit claims are far too common.

Despite addiction risk, are necessary in cases

[Anonymous Coward]

I think the obsession with Opoids is concerning becuase they do have legitimate uses as a painkiller. Ive heard of 3 day limits to their use. If someone is in that much pain i think they may need them for longer than 3 days. The war on drugs was a disaster, basically filled up prisons. Addiction is a necessary price to pay when these drugs are used, what we need to do is when they are prescribed have a follow-up detox and monitoring program to help people wean themselves off the drugs.

We should treat drug addiction like an illness rather than a crime and go as far as have drug parks like in Europe to eliminate the black market where this stuff gets sold. The war on drugs and strong drug laws actually creates the black market by making it more difficult and thus more profitable to sell these things. Thats why the war on drugs had the opposite effect as intended.

Re:Despite addiction risk, are necessary in cases

[Eravnrekaree]

The drug parks in Europe helped reduce the black market where drugs are marketed to new users thus helping put them out of business.

By trying to go down the war on drugs path again we are repeating all the same mistakes again. rather than criminalize the drug we should instead address underlying cultural and social problems that are leading to their use, like the very poor moral exemplars coming from hollywood, the lack of virtue, morality and ethics in our mainstream culture as promoted by Lady Gaga, Britney Spears, etc. and the manner in which many communities have been rendered rustbelts by disasterous trade and offshoring policies which devastated many communiites, causing people to turn to drugs to relieve their pain. If we help people living fulfilling happy lives and promote a family values culture of stable marriage and so on, and teach the youth morality, virtue, and to cherish adn respect their country rather than the moral depravity and debasement of the present mass media and the constant villification of this country, the drug use will go down.

Social cost

[Anonymous Coward]

How many kratom addicts are doing crimes to support their habit? How many of them litter dirty IV needles all over public places? Take away their kratom and they will be on that mexican black tar shit which definitely causes criminal and biologically unsafe behavior. Once again the government fails at harm reduction and ignores the human cost associated with their management of a health and safety issue as purely a criminal justice issue.

Great marketing!

[VeryFluffyBunny]

Yes, this means that the FDA has officially announced that kratom has similar therapeutic effects to other opioids. Anyone looking to reduce their prescription charges or kick an oxycodone or hydrocodone habit (apparently it's less addictive) now knows that this is a medically legitimate option rather than some pseudo-science scam.

No thank you

[PopeRatzo]

If three fingers of bourbon and a quarter ounce of weed can't take me there, I ain't going.

  [This message has been brought to you by the Association of California Marijuana Dispensaries. Please smoke and drive sensibly, and wait until you're twenty-one. If you're pregnant, ask your doctor before scarfing down that bag of edibles you dumb cow. That's how you got knocked up in the first place.]

Weird Classification

[moehoward]

The pathway that opioids take in the pleasure centers is the same as alcohol. This was discovered in the 1960s. Different drugs (and experiences, etc.) take different pleasure pathways. Alcohol and opioids take the same path, and has to do with at least 4 important chemicals in the brain (serotonin, GABA, etc.). There are lots of different paths, but booze and opioids take the same one.

Why would this thingy be classified that way just because it affects the brain the same as opioids? Alcohol does. So alcohol is now an opioid?

Well, regaring the "war on drugs", remember Nixon:

[Anonymous Coward]

Adam Ruins Everything - The Sinister Reason Weed is Illegal

You can bet money that that shit still goes on.

Fuck the Trump administration.

[mrseth]

Fuck the Trump administration. This decision is what will kill many, as kratom helps legions of people get off truly dangerous opiates. Kratom is not at all dangerous. Cheeseburgers are more dangerous than kratom. I thought it was impossible for me to hate the Trump administration any more than I already do, but now I hate them even more. How is it we keep electing the most awful people in the country?

Keep them slaves and serfs addicted

[doccus]

It sure wouldn't do to have a safe and easy cure for all those people tied to the nuts on methadone and other strong opioids.
On one hand they decry the "opioid epidemic" but on the other they collude with the suppliers to keep everyone addicted. What other possible reason for smuggling thousands of tons of heroin and growing the largest poppy fields in Afghanistan they've ever had .. all guarded by US troops, BTW. I wouldn't be surprised if the poppies were the main impetus to invade Afghanistan, rather than oil.
  "There's gold in them thar bulbs!"
Actually I really like fresh opium. It's a real treat.. Unfortunately, since I no longer travel in those circles, I probably won't see any, anymore in my lifetime. Ahh well..