FDA Declares Popular Alt-Medicine Kratom an Opioid (nbcnews.com) 230
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.
"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.
You know, if people want to.... (Score:3, Insightful)
Maybe this is just nature at work, and putting some needed chlorine into the gene pool?
Re:You know, if people want to.... (Score:4, Informative)
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: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
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.... (Score:5, Insightful)
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: (Score:3)
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
Re:You know, if people want to.... (Score:4, Insightful)
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: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
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
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What the devil are you on about? (Score:2, Flamebait)
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 [theatlantic.com] that _you_ compete with) while allowing roundabout institutionalized racism and segregation [google.com]. There is literally
Re:What the devil are you on about? (Score:4, Interesting)
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.
I know you are but what am I (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
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? (Score:5, Informative)
The age of "racist drug policy" is long gone;
False. [jhu.edu]
the urge to ban substances is based on authoritarianism and dogooderism.
And it disproportionately targets blacks and other minorities [aclu.org] (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: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
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
Re: (Score:3)
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.... (Score:5, Interesting)
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.... (Score:2, Redundant)
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: (Score:2, Insightful)
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 sec
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
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 disrespec
Re: (Score:2)
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.... (Score:5, Informative)
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.... (Score:3)
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: (Score:2)
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.... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:You know, if people want to.... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
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 exa
Re: (Score:3)
Not all opiates should be treated the
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:You know, if people want to.... (Score:4, Informative)
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: (Score:3)
TFS literally says people have died from it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
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 stuf
Re: (Score:2)
Why is death the only 'harm' considered?
Re:You know, if people want to.... (Score:5, Interesting)
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.... (Score:5, Insightful)
True. This is why I grow my own willow trees to make willow tea; because aspirin is too damn expensive.
Re: (Score:2)
Stupidity rules (Score:5, Insightful)
"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 (Score:4, Insightful)
That's not science, that's anecdotes.
It gets even better; the whole war on drugs is completely unconstitutional.
Re: (Score:2)
"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 unconstitut
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
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 [ca.gov])
* United States v. Miller (1939): The S
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
"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: (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Stupidity rules (Score:5, Interesting)
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: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
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.
Learning (Score:5, Informative)
Learn something new every day. Never even heard of "kratom" until today.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
"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."
Government For Sale (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm just going to leave this here...
http://www.pogo.org/our-work/r... [pogo.org]
Re: (Score:3)
"The love of money is the root of all evil."
This is to be expected (Score:2)
Not Helping Further Public Health (Score:5, Insightful)
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... [webmd.com]
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: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
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
Re: (Score:2)
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 acc
Re: (Score:3)
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: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
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 man
Re: (Score:3)
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, an
Re: (Score:2)
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
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:3)
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 ab
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
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
And yet you can still buy and grow opium poppy. (Score:4, Interesting)
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: (Score:2)
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.
It's "odd"... (Score:2)
...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.
...and sugar / HCFS? (Score:2)
Their cases are all mostly flawed (Score:2)
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.....
Great marketing! (Score:2)
No thank you (Score:3)
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 (Score:2)
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 alcoho
Fuck the Trump administration. (Score:2)
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?
Re: (Score:2)
No?
Re: (Score:2)
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 (Score:5, Insightful)
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: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
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
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
Anyone opposing marijuana legalization also might get contribution checks from illegal drug dealers. Legalizing the stuff would cut down on their business hard.
Re: (Score:2)
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
Re: (Score:2)
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, Britn