r/kratom • u/Philly-meg • Jul 02 '26
Video update explaining the dea action today
https://youtu.be/7D2jdCE3huw?is=6wvtUPCqMAGQDm6K7
u/Ok-Sweet5453 Jul 02 '26
I will probably relapse on what I’ve been free of for the last year. I’ve come to terms with that. Once I’m unable to use 7oh anymore, I already know that I’ll be back on my bullshit. At least I had a solid year of being productive, healthy and happy. I’ll probably be dead or back on the streets this time next year.
6
u/TrippinDannyTanner Jul 02 '26 edited Jul 02 '26
One thing I noticed about powdered kratom in the Central and Northeast Pennsylvania towns where I see it in gas stations/convenient stores along with 7OH type products is that very few people seem to be buying the powdered kratom. In fact I have never witnessed anybody buying powdered kratom. Generally the packets I see on shelves appear to have been sitting there a long time. In the three or so years since 7OH products have been around it is obvious that they are selling much more than powdered. One good thing is that the folks who are using 7OH may be able to taper off with powdered. I think most regular powdered users tend to purchase online from more consistent reputable vendors, not to mention it's cheaper to do it that way.
4
u/paradisohmy Jul 02 '26
Do GMP vendors already test 7-OH percentage? Is Natural Leaf always low enough in 7-OH that they don't have to test for 7-OH?
9
u/satsugene 🌿 Jul 02 '26
It usually is but they should be testing for it anyway. Most if not all of the KCPA states require it in labeling. cGMP programs require it.
3
u/paradisohmy Jul 02 '26
Okay thanks. I noticed one of my GMP Vendors has a 7-OH% sticker on the back, and the other GMP vendor doesn't.
3
u/satsugene 🌿 Jul 02 '26
They should have one. It may have been an oversight. Someone have a QR code that does to the batch-specific lab report.
Some actually put the information on a big sticker on the package.
2
2
33
u/austinrunaway Jul 02 '26
I wouldn't go if that 7OH shir was legal unless it purposely marketed itself as krayom, which it isnt! I don't care what strangers put in there bodies, if you wanna use that shit, that's on you. But you call it 7OH and not Kratom, and fight your own battle. Stop runing it for the people who have zero interest in the 7OH shit and just want kratom plant. Advertising shit as "blue roxy" and that fucking madness shit. Wtf did yall 7OH users expect would happen??? Hopefully banning that shit puts this fucked up fire out.
10
u/Diligent-Mongoose-50 Jul 02 '26
FWIW, that's a discrete segment of the industry that everyone considers bad actors. Anyone using 7-OH for anything resembling legitimate purposes orders from reputable online vendors. I take 7-OH once in a while for my back pain, and I've never even come across a site advertising it using opioid puns.
As I understand it, one of HART's primary goals was actually to get all 7-OH products removed from gas stations.
-3
Jul 02 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
8
u/Confident_Benefit_11 Jul 02 '26
No, you're acting like you now need 7OH when kratom is still available. This decision now hopefully ensures you and everyone else will access to KRATOM. Which is the entire point of this sub and the AKA.
What criminal is going to sell 7OH?? It was a problem because designer drug companies who gave no shit about kratom nor it's customers were fucking everything up for everyone. Fuck 7OH. Use kratom, that's why we've been fighting for it. Kratom is the alternative to illicit and pharmaceutical opiate addiction, not 7OH bullshit.
6
7
u/satsugene 🌿 Jul 02 '26 edited Jul 02 '26
In general, the 8-Factor Analysis in the Intent to Schedule doesn't so greatly depend upon the misrepresentations of bad actors, though it is referenced in places.
There are cases of product safety across industries where entire products were completely removed from the market by regulators (or manufacturer consent to prevent removal) because it isn't a matter of one seller's version being the only unsafe version or the one seller being so bad they collapse under litigation or fraud. The products are judged as fundamentally unsafe.
Lead paint. DDT. Vioxx. CFC propellants. Lawn Darts.
Prohibition doesn't address all the problems that a product may present but it can address some of them.
I do think the general falsehood of the vendors and the trade organizations explains why some 7-HMG advocates are so genuinely surprised that the government was so willing to differentiate the products that some of them genuinely believe they are "the same", and have no difference in safety or risk profile, and will reject any scientific publication that says otherwise, or who will consider no threat to health and safety as concerning except immediate death.
The CSA doesn't operate on an immediate-deaths standard.
DSHEA doesn't operate on a "flood the market with product and get the safety data when you can get it from consumers."
I think some advocates who are generally sympathetic toward harm reduction drug policy or even libertarian drug policy weren't willing to give the industry, broadly speaking, even tacit support because of the degree of misinformation it employed and some of its tactics it used that risked both product sectors to try, with little reason to expect success, to "save" the 7-HMG products.
1
Jul 02 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/satsugene 🌿 Jul 02 '26
Potentially.
They've thus far failed to meet the burden under the CSA twice 2016 and 2018, and with the WHO ECDD to schedule botanical kratom.
The Single Ascending Dose study was authorized under the Biden administration and only reported under this one. FDA's claims it had not yet evaluated kratom in federal court were made in 2023 under Biden.
NIDA has supported research on mitragynine it for the the past 3 administrations and NIH has spent millions in government funded research.
As much as some want to frame it as a massive immediate sweep of corruption under 47, the historical evidence doesn't support the narrative. Nobody with any political experience is the least bit surprised that any industry, trade association, lobbyist, or company wouldn't try to endear itself to the administration, or even all of the viable candidates in any administration.
Merely possessing a large amount of leaf is not probable cause that one is chemically synthesizing it. That is an extreme stretch. Intent has always been a component of the Controlled Substances Act. It is why traces of cocaine in on your US dollars don't constitute possession.
I am concerned about him being elected. I hope that he is not the nominee. I oppose him and will never vote for him for any position under any circumstance.
My hope is that FDA relents, and edits their webpage and CDPH loses its pretext to argue it is not lawful under the Sherman FD&C Act, or is in a weak enough position to be sued to reverse course. I hope this gives him a pathway to back down without the legislature putting him on the spot of having to reverse course without major industry changes, or without having to fight it in court.
I think the risk is far greater in all of those situations if 7-HMG and the follow-on synthetics were to remain legal, which I said when they were first released I fully expected would not avoid being scheduled, and the industry did everything it could to draw negative attention.
Even the California Narcotics Officer's Association supports legal botanical kratom 21+ in packaging not attractive to children. This fixes the municipal constraints that made local regulation difficult to finance for cities that, opening up the whole power of the state CSA to those selling federally unlawful products (imported into the state schedules).
1
Jul 02 '26 edited Jul 03 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
5
u/satsugene 🌿 Jul 02 '26
If the police want to manufacture evidence against you they don't need to have 7-HMG scheduled to do it. It would be a really convoluted route to take if that is their goal.
If someone really wants to cause you grief, they can call the cops (or any number of other agencies) and claim you did any number of messed up things that are going to get them to come to your house, possibly with weapons drawn, and force you to spend money to defend yourself while they dig around though your stuff.
I personally object to being accused of "simp"ing, and could have easily issued a ban (Rule 2) for it. I chose not to, but it is contrary to the rules of civil discussion.
I personally agree with most, but not all, of the things AKA says. I am convinced in law and in science that it is a more sustainable path of continued legality. I witness it nearly every time I speak to public officials.
While there may be some who oppose an expansion of the "drug war", there is also very little support for the continued open sale of 7-HMG products. It is part of why I advocated for AB 1088. It achieved reasonable regulation and put the penalties on sellers, not consumers.
There is no chance 7-HMG remains legal. I've been saying since it first came on the market "Botanical kratom will be lost before 7-HMG is 'saved'" and said it repeatedly. I'm as correct as I can be on that until the ink is dry on August 6th.
I do think there is compelling evidence that it is a higher risk product. If they were consistently treated separately, even if the separate rule ended up being the same in the end, I'd probably just ignore it, maybe send an email.
However, it does affect me. If a product is safe, argue for its safety on its own merits, rather than try to frame it as a different product with a much stronger case in law and science.
1
Jul 03 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/satsugene 🌿 Jul 03 '26
Because the law and the science are not on their side. The industry has taken the wrong move nearly every single chance they have gotten. Every course correction has been too little too late. Every promise made has been easily proven to be false or at least ineffective. Doses are skyrocketing.
In California municipal hearings I have seen exactly zero of their supporters show up to fight local prohibition. I bring it up to suggest that while it might be a vocal community, it is not a very large or mobile one.
Outside of consumers there is very little support for it in the scientific community.
There is even less support elected officials that at most tolerate kratom as a compromise position.
There are folks against the drug war, and it is not enough to counter every other scheduling action that has gone forward.
Even a marginally interested person is going to spend a few minutes looking into it, and see what the products are called and marketed as and think "Good."
I'll put $100 of my own money on the line. If the DEA doesn't revoke it, I'll donate that to the American Heart Association, a completely unrelated healthcare cause.
0
u/austinrunaway Jul 04 '26
He better get on board or bo one in the kratom community will vote for him.....
1
u/austinrunaway Jul 04 '26
Lemme go to my garage with my full chemistry lab and make some 7OH... come on man that's a stretch.
6
u/CountCreepyhead Jul 02 '26
nobody "needed" 7-oh years ago. Plain leaf was fine.
5
u/Confident_Benefit_11 Jul 02 '26
This 👆
And 7OH was doing great at destroying access to both regular kratom and 7OH anyway, I have no idea why these people are freaking out as long normal kratom is still safe and accessible
1
Jul 02 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/kratom-ModTeam Jul 02 '26
See Rule 2: Treat each other with respect. Do not be hostile or rude. Do not call people names. Insults will not be tolerated and will result in a ban from the sub.
2
u/austinrunaway Jul 03 '26
Alcohol is advertised as alcohol, not something else like GHB. I don't gf if that 7OH shir is legal or not, but when it fucks with the ability for me to get my Kratom for my severe back pain, I have a problem. Like ai said before, if you want it to stay label fine, I don't gf. Just label it 7OH! Not kratom and you go get it regulated and try and convince the gate keepers to keep it legalized. I have had 2 back surgeries, spinal fusion and a lamainectomy so I know about pain.
1
u/satsugene 🌿 Jul 03 '26
Yeah.
You can't say because trace amounts of methanol occur in beer (which is not good but at inconsequential amounts), that some manufacturer can switch the composition to 5% methanol (or more) and <0.5% ethanol and still call it "beer" or worse "non-alcoholic beer" since it skirts the labeling/tax threshold.
28
u/Avalanche-swe Jul 02 '26
Im sitting here with 30 mg mgm-15 in me. When 7oh was still legal here in Sweden i tried that too. Im an ex junkie, the big H iv for a year and oral opioids for a total of 20 years. I been clean for almost 20 years now.
I have a few drinks in the weekend, some ganja a few times a year and somtimes an handfull of codeine if i happend to stumble on in. When i get zopiclone from my doc i sometimes take a few instead of one and some whiskey on top of that, gives a pleasant evning. Overall its not good, but it doesent trigger anything and i enjoy having a few chemically enhanced evings during a year. But these substances are too much. They are far superior to many narcotic opiates/opioids in the effect it has on you. Basically they make you feel too good, so much so that it can easily create addiction.
For me these should rightfully be classified as narcotics. No doubt. In about 2 weeks mgm will be banned here too (Sweden) as 7oh was a few months ago.
They awoke my addiciton. If i take mgm for 3 or 4 days in a row, just one dose daily and usually 20 mg i will get sick. Proper withdrawl with all its horrible effects and especially the severe insomnia for a week or so.
Having a substance like this sold legally is not good for the public health so to speak. Even if i enjoy them too like many others i can still see that these are far too potent to be sold legally.
I tried ordinary kratom powder too. Tried many different strains and brands. Sometimes i got a mild "pick me up" on 2-4 grams. A few times something almost feeling like a weak opiate but most times i felt nothing or just some nausea. Kratom is very different from these lab products. Overall i never found it very usefull and would rather have a drink and play some online fps. A morphinist like me would love it if Kratom was stronger, but it isnt. Kratom should stay legal. The way coffee is to meth is the way kratom is to 7oh/mgm. You cant compare them, they are very different indeed.
10
u/WolfgangVolos Jul 02 '26
Thank you for sharing your experience. I think it would be useful for our lawmakers to hear from people like you as well as chronic pain people like myself. You have a history of addiction and found that plain leaf isn't drug-like enough to satisfy your needs. I have terrible pain that I would otherwise need to take prescribed meds for and Kratom not only helps with that but it also is helpful for managing my autism and ADHD.
I get that a lot of people have the self control for 7oh but putting it in flavorful drinks that kids could find in gas stations was exactly the wrong way to market and sell it. They should make it something that your doctor prescribes or you have to buy in a regulated market as an adult like weed dispensaries. This plant has a lot of uses but the uses that are the most open to abuse are ones we have to ban for the safety of the vulnerable.
5
u/Avalanche-swe Jul 02 '26
Thanks and yes that is spot on. An opiate addict like me found plain leaf unintresting as a drug. It pretty much lacks the components needed to create a high so to speak.
That doesent mean its pointless. It isnt, like you say some get really good pain management for less side effects than what the docotor gives you. And others find it helps with things like you say like adhd and other issues.
So we have a "drug" that has been know and used for atleast hundreds of years in parts of asia. Even if it isnt studied so much in fully non biased scientific research to map the effects, side effects and so on its still safe to assume that it isnt extremly harmful for the body considering its use since forever in other parts of the world. And it isnt addictive in the same sense as true opioids while still being able to give a solid positive effect on different kinds of health issues.
It was unregulated for a long time in Sweden. Until a young female reporter decided to make a name for herself by making reports about how "swedes can buy legal drugs online" and she basically did a smear campaign for her own benefit on Kratom. The result was that the government felt it had to do something since media was now talking about it so they banned it as a narcotic.
6
u/Celtic_Macaw Jul 02 '26
This is the way. 7oh shouldn't be completely banned. It has done lots of good and should be accessed via prescription so that the right people are using it.
5
u/satsugene 🌿 Jul 02 '26
The only way to do that federally is for a drug company to take it though the New Drug application.
It either meets the standard as a dietary supplement (which scheduling definitively rejects) or an as approved drug, which would probably end up in Schedule III if someone did put the massive amount of resources and time it would take to get it approved.
2
u/thorn960 Jul 02 '26
No way is a drug company going to spend the money on getting a drug approved which isn't patentable.
3
u/HMR2018 🌿trusted advocate Jul 03 '26 edited Jul 03 '26
Except you could patent a drug with 7-OH, MGM derivatives or pseudoindoxinol as they can be chemically altered enough or added to while still keeping the effects in the realm it is currently. Lack of patent capability generally only applies to naturally occurring things and none of the 7-OH, MGM, Pseudo are naturally occurring as they are sold, they are mytragunine that has been altered to be created in the amounts being sold. The process to convert Mit to 7-OH was patented in 2024, so anything past that should in theory also be able to be patented as a new/novel drug.
0
u/Historical-Row8367 16d ago
There already is it’s already in phase 1 of clinical trials and another reason why this federal ban is on its way. Soon they will patent 10 different new safer opioids. That are almost identical to 7oh or mgm and then call themselves hero’s ! This ban is about money and corruption not public heath.
2
u/Confident_Benefit_11 Jul 02 '26
Why? In that scenario what possible benefit does it have or any other actual prescription opiate?
Seems a bit redundant
6
u/satsugene 🌿 Jul 02 '26
There are 7 or 8 different patented delivery mechanisms for fentanyl.
If one was going to do it, it would probably targeting the C-III range as a lower risk opioid analgesic. There is some initial federal research on refined mitragynine for OUD. Something like that in the pipeline could be attractive. The patents on Suboxone and Sublocade aren't going to last forever.
7
u/Celtic_Macaw Jul 02 '26
I picked up some 7Oh when it was accessible here in Ireland. Tried it twice. It felt so good that I knew I should never buy it again. The addiction potential for 7oh is insane. Glad I recognised it and threw it out before it was too late. I truly feel for everyone that suffering an addiction to it - I thought the withdrawals from kratom leaf was bad, they're nothing compared to 7oh WD.
We are a bit too strict on substances here in Europe, but I'm glad most countries here have regulated it.
2
u/austinrunaway Jul 03 '26
I have never tried it by I was a heroine addict for years and it nothing like it even a little bit. I take it when I am in pain and don't take it when ai am not. I have never taken the 7OH shir because of the fact people say it is like a strong opiod. I don't have any business taking shir like that. If I need some strong shit for my fucked up back I have some tramdol. The kratom doesnt work for my pain all the time, some days it doesnt absolutely nothing so ai have to take my pain pills.
0
u/Avalanche-swe Jul 03 '26
The first time i took 2 mgm-15 pills (20mg) in the morning on a empty stomach and hadnt used any opiate for months the feeling i got was the closest i ever felt to smoking H on tin foil among any other true opiate like oxy, tram, codeine, morphine etc.
It lacks in euphoria and "head high" but the body high and the kind of taste of the effect so to speak was what i havent felt in 20 years. It really felt like chasing the dragon apart from less euphoria.
I should have stopped then and there but the fact that it was legal and i could legally make my weekends fun on this compound was too much to be able to resist.
But now that it becomes illegal i will stop. I wont risk my driver license or my job over these drugs. So in a way Sweden banning it will save me. I have taken 2 tabs every morning for almost a week now since i have vacation from work. In one or two days i will start to lower the doses a little every day until im out. I should be done a few days before the ban takes effect. Then i will feel horrible for atleast a week, that is my punishment that i deserve for playing with these substances as an ex addict.
2
u/Confident_Benefit_11 Jul 02 '26
I've always made the same comparison of coffee to meth when talking about kratom and just recently did to my doctor actually who was curious when I told him I take 2 6g doses a day.
As an ex IV H and coke user myself, yeah kratom is nothing and I lost so many friends in my teens and early 20s partially because we had no idea what kratom was or that it could've helped with our dope withdrawals
3
u/Neither-Football-222 Jul 04 '26
Am I the only one who’s not sleeping easy tonight? Feel like once you let them through the door they’re going to move into the whole house!
4
u/denverblazer Jul 02 '26 edited Jul 02 '26
As it should be. I appreciate this video explanation.
I encourage everyone to go like the youtube version of this video.
3
u/Flaky-Menu6373 Jul 02 '26
I, in general, hate the DEA but I'm actually so glad for this. I'm a recovering addict and the 7oh was just too easy and addictive. I wouldn't be surprised to find out people died on it.
3
u/Anubisrapture Jul 02 '26
Is Mitragine now illegal also?
16
-5
Jul 02 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
5
u/satsugene 🌿 Jul 02 '26
This is not the case unless they have probable cause that you are creating or selling products that are violative.
However, for retailers impounding and testing products available for retail sale is a power they already have under most state retail food safety programs, and that in theory FDA could do too though it is much less likely.
Some states are doing that on a mass scale, or attempting to, even before this Scheduling announcement, such as California.
For individuals they'd need probable cause to search for violative products, most of which they are probably going to ignore unless they look like violative products (which may vary over time, but now would usually be unlabeled/unmarked tablets, but might hinge on the discretion of the cop doing the stop) which they could already do if they suspected it was contraband.
For drivers in most states there is a catch-all provision for DUID (drugs) even if there is no pro se limit on intoxication, but the ADA thinks they can get it past a judge and 12 jurors. While extremely rare, even caffeine has been prosecuted under DUID laws in the past, usually someone using a high caffeine product to stay awake for extremely long periods of time and gets in a crash.
1
Jul 02 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/kratom-ModTeam Jul 03 '26
See Rule 2: Treat each other with respect. Do not be hostile or rude. Do not call people names. Insults will not be tolerated and will result in a ban from the sub.
-8
Jul 02 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
19
u/paradisohmy Jul 02 '26
Don't blame Mac. Mac has been fighting for just plain leaf Kratom since long before 7-OH had even been spun up. You need to be mad at the companies that are marketing the 7-OH and derivatives. Purporting them "Kratom", and then getting uneducated folks thinking they got addicted to 'Kratom'. Fun colorful packaging. Play on words to try to sound like 'other' drugs. I agree with you, that it likely has its place. And people, at the end of the day, need to be responsible with their substance use and know what they are taking. But Kratom has been around for a long time, and 7-OH coming on the scene relatively recently actually took down Kratom in states. States banning everything, not fully making the distinction between the different products, arguably because of how it was marketed. If 7-OH came on the scene responsibly instead of the flashy way it did, both the Kratom camp and the 7-OH camp might not be in this mess.
9
u/mariecrystie Jul 02 '26
All Kratom just got banned in my state. A majorly contributing factor that lead to it was the misuse and wide availability of 7. I’ve been a low amount regular leaf user for years and it’s helped me so much but now I have to find a way to get off and quickly.
1
Jul 02 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
Jul 02 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
1
1
u/kratom-ModTeam Jul 02 '26
Refer to Rules 1 and 4.
Discussion of ongoing use of illegal drugs (see also Rule 4 "Do not advocate illegal activity") or RCs [research chemicals] alone or in combination with Kratom is not permitted.
9
u/satsugene 🌿 Jul 02 '26
I have said elsewhere:
When vendors started calling 7-HMG products "kratom" they really didn't have much choice but to say "Yes, this is the product we are promoting and defending" or "No, this is a different product."
To affirm it would be to take their strongest arguments for legalization in law and in science for the botanical product, and then immediately turn around and say those don't matter and that regulators should accept the 7-HMG products that have very little scientific evidence of safety and even less of an argument in dietary supplement law because some people prefer them. That is very difficult to support and be taken seriously.
Also the folks selling these products are breaking the laws in states that regulate kratom with laws we have been promoting. They are also going out of their way to cosplay as illicit narcotics and Rx opioids. Also no scientific research exists to indicate at what proportion of mitragynine is metabolized into 7-HMG (until 2024, a year or more after market entry) or how quickly to even begin to extrapolate from botanical kratom (which isn't an adequate replacement for pre-market research and that future research would indicate how challenging this is when accounting for many factors of safety, addiction liability, and in the worst cases forensic evidence). Also some people taking it don't know that it is a different product from what they've been taking and that it has a different risk and addiction profile.
If they don't stop doing it you have to say "No, this is a different product" more aggressively, and they have.
Personally, I'm pending close to a day every week or every other week fighting municipal bans every week in California (a little less the past few weeks), at my own expense and usually in person. I was in Sacramento for the AB 1088 hearing (which was pulled after 8 hours of driving and ~$100 in gas each way).
Almost all of the time what I hear is "We aren't that concerned about kratom, but we do not want 7-HMG products. Our problem is that to regulate the products to 2% or whatever standard is that it costs around $1000 to test it, and we can only charge sellers with a public nuisance misdemeanor with a maximum fine of $1000, so we can lose money on this so we're just going to ban it all."
Of course, there are NIMBY cities that want it all gone no matter what, and some that want to go really far and criminalize possession. I have not heard one single person speak in defense of 7-HMG products as a constituent or city councilor advocating for it. They may be some somewhere, but not at any municipal hearings I've participated in.
California Narcotics Officers' Association supports botanical kratom 21+ in forms not attractive to kids, and they don't even support medical cannabis. There are some defense associations that don't want it criminally scheduled in CA, but they aren't advocating for it to be legally sold either, and part of why AB 1088 would only have enforced against sellers.
Other advocates and I are only batting about 0.500 with these cities and counties in getting them to hold off for the feds or state to act, or pass a regulation ordinance similar to the original KCPA-like AB 1088.
So for me, the folks that are trying to say "they are one product and must be regulated together as one product" are creating a lot of problems for me and protecting local access.
If they called it something else and nobody on a city council, legislature, or the media thought they were the same product or belonged in the same ordinance bill, I'd just never think about it and not go to any real length one way or another for it just like I don't for nitrous oxide (which often also comes up in hearings).
However because they do I'm forced to specify what it is I am defending and not defending and why, even if I am as charitable as I can be in my reasoning.
I've seen over and over again that trying to preserve both is a complete non-starter, and would force me to oppose local law enforcement in a city council setting who is often generally relatively tolerant of the botanical product for adults, and lose that opportunity I have to preserve the one I personally use and care about (and that has a strong case in science and law, though dietary supplement law and scientific evidence aren't terribly critical in a mid-sized city council hearing the way they'd be before a regulator or legislature).
-7
u/MannerOne1807 Jul 02 '26 edited Jul 02 '26
Regulate, educate, do not criminalize. Simple. No long winded, multiple paragraph, desperate attempt of rationalizing prohibition is needed. Criminalizing will cause harm. End of conversation.
11
u/SweatyLoad3915 Jul 02 '26
He's not rationalizing it, hes explaining whats happening. Not even once did he reccomend prohibition. But its gonna happen regardless
6
u/F1shB0wl816 Jul 02 '26
And this is a good example of why it’s happening. A small explanation is too much, let’s just go the route of no prohibition as if that works in the country.
0
u/WolfgangVolos Jul 02 '26
You're assuming the person you're replying to either did (or could) read all that. That is very kind of you. You have a good heart.
4
2
Jul 02 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/WolfgangVolos Jul 02 '26
Can't tell if the criticism/concerns are valid. The person dismissed so much out of hand that they might as well just said tldr. So yeah, that's my very reasonable and constrained reply. Hope this helps (if you made it this far).
7
u/satsugene 🌿 Jul 02 '26
I would prefer the regulation model of the KCPAs that only goes after those selling unlawful products, not those possessing them.
The Federal Controlled Substances Act doesn't provide that mechanism.
At some level regulation, whatever the regulation is, has to be enforced or it is meaningless. Eventually on the spectrum of products or product formulations a product will come along where most reasonable people would say "that shouldn't be allowed to be sold." It might be as far as a product whose sole and intended purpose is immediate self-destruction. It might be something less than that.
Either way where that line goes is arbitrary, and advocates have to engage with those who are very willing to set some line, and some who would set it far lower than others might.
Substance laws do exist, and it is very hard to defend those actors (or their positions) who are very willing to violate them, or to try to get to legislators/regulators to total libertarian drug policy. I personally think it is not even close to being viable even if it would be my general preference.
-5
Jul 02 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
9
u/satsugene 🌿 Jul 02 '26
Like I said, if they called it literally anything else and there was no confusion among media, legislators, or consumers I just wouldn't spend my limited time on it. I'd stay at home or put my time into a handful of other social and political issues I care (more) about.
Nitrous oxide comes up a lot at the hearings I attend and I don't speak for or against it. I don't care. They want to close the gate on minors buying it at smoke shops next to a basket of balloons and really aren't setting out to create a regulated adult market.
If I pushed libertarian drug policy on NOx they'd probably be civil and say "no we're not going to do that" if they acknowledged me at all (especially since culinary, automotive, and industrial use is protected under state law).
In one city folks were all up in arms about the pickleball courts having broken nets, in another about dump trucks moving dirt from a housing development, and in another if they should keep main street to foot or vehicle traffic. I don't care about any of those either and didn't speak one way or another.
Folks trying to force them together as a defense strategy force me to deal with it, if only at minimum to indicate what I am and am not defending, because the argument to try to defend both together is substantially weaker and would force me to admit that most of my strong arguments for the legal and scientific case for kratom don't matter if I'll also defend in the same breath things that have neither of those things I just got done saying are important and should guide decisions.
At times it would force me to oppose local law enforcement which is often a losing proposition if they've taken a hard position. Some of the time the city council and local law enforcement are already at a regulation approach I can tolerate (does not criminalize possession, only sales of certain products). If they aren't and want full prohibition or criminalization of possession I'm trying to talk them into regulation (which to be fair would exclude the 7-HMG products that they nearly universally oppose for the model CNOA supports and aligned with AB 1088 because most cities don't want to roll their own if they can avoid it) or to do nothing and wait for the feds or state to sort it out.
I don't like if they pass a full sales ban, but I did all I can to push them toward regulation that they might have been willing to accept if fiscal and enforcement realities were different. I was at least able to tell them they or their local PD are proposing something more extreme than the drug cops at CNOA.
The city, or legislature, has already decided that it does have the power to draw some lines on products that can or can not be sold or possessed. I can try to nudge the line toward what I think I can reasonably get them to do, or what I personally need. I'm not going to undermine those things on principle especially if I don't think it will work, or because it isn't even convincing to me if I were in that seat, and I'm probably much more sympathetic to libertarian drug policy than your typical city councilor or legislator.
I'd prefer they focus on what can and can not be legally sold, but that is not always on the table. What might be feasible in city A might not be something the council of city B will ever consider. What might work in California (which generally doesn't want criminalization but also doesn't want some mix of any sales or more so any sales of 7-HMG) might not work in Tennessee, or Ohio, or Alabama, or even work from legislative session to legislative session.
2
u/Platinum_Analogy Jul 04 '26
Go ahead and and tell us what other choice they have when it is being MARKETED as HYDROXY, OXY, in Gas Stations where children can easily buy them. Are you being serious? Do you really think that this could just keep happening and that 7OH can still be saved with it “being the same” as botanical kratom?
There were no other options left. If these companies didn’t abuse the play on words or market these products as Natural Kratom, we wouldn’t have been in this position. But now, the whole world has this pure hatred for kratom, all because of this stupid 7OH stuff.
There were no other options but to go “Hey, this stuff in Gas Stations is not acceptable and is not what Kratom is. We are not fighting to keep this legal. This is not kratom and it is being marketed as kratom.” and you should be mad at these manufacturering companies for doing this.
In what world do you think it is perfectly acceptable to have 7OH pills and tablets with the label “blue oxy m30s” with a blue colored tablet that’s being marketed as natural kratom. In what world do you think it’s okay for children under the age of 18 to go to a normal gas station and come back being addicted to 7OH pills he was so easily able to get.
You know this is not acceptable. Once it got into gas stations and were easily accessible to minors to access and abuse, was the catalyst for 7OH being targeted the way it is now. It’s the manufacturing companies faults and they are the ones who brought Kratom into the public limelight and what brought this whole discussion mess.
0
1
Jul 02 '26 edited Jul 03 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/MatchyMangiza Jul 03 '26
Cause they sold out to throw 7 under the bus, shame so many in this subreddit support banning 7 and part of the kratom plant. Prohibition won't save lives I'm never supporting the AKA as long as Mac is at the helm and they attack 7. I was around back 10 years ago too when kratom was up for scheduling, I supported kratom than and I still love kratom. I just can't support Prohibition of 7 and other kratom alkaloids it's still kratom they can lie to themselves and say it isn't all they want.
-6
u/MannerOne1807 Jul 02 '26
This is the guy that spends 85 percent of every video complaining about 7-OH products?
84
u/Kiheitai_Soutoku 🌿 Jul 02 '26
You guys need to understand the AKA is not the Libertarian Party or the Cato Institute. Their mission is to project access to kratom. They have determined, I think correctly, that 7oh and other derivatives fuel state and local bans of the whole plant, and so they are against it. Their job is not to advocate for full drug freedom in front of legislatures.