Increasing Regulatory Attention on Kratom by State and Federal Authorities

Kratom, a herbal supplement traditionally used for pain relief, anxiety, and opioid withdrawal, is currently under heightened scrutiny by both state governments and federal agencies. Historically, the regulation of kratom has been fragmented, with some states imposing bans while others have adopted laws governing age restrictions, labeling, and testing requirements. Over half of U.S. states plus the District of Columbia have established some form of regulation for kratom or its components, creating a complex patchwork of policies in the absence of comprehensive federal oversight.

Recently, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced plans to classify 7-hydroxymitragynine (7-OH), a potent compound found in small amounts in kratom, as a Schedule I substance. This move aims to ban the synthetic or concentrated forms of 7-OH, which is often produced or sold illegally and is associated with significant health risks. The FDA emphasizes that 7-OH, which is much more potent than morphine, poses a high abuse potential and is responsible for many of kratom’s opioid-like effects. This regulatory shift marks a major change from previous FDA attempts to control kratom, which encountered strong public opposition in 2016.

While the natural kratom leaves and powders are not solely targeted, the focus on 7-OH reflects concern over concentrated and synthetic products often sold online or in smoke shops. Researchers highlight that more studies are needed to fully understand the long-term health effects of kratom and 7-OH, including their addiction potential and safety profile. Experts like Dr. Christopher McCurdy point out that kratom may assist with opioid withdrawal, acting as a stimulant at lower doses and sedative at higher doses, but the long-term risks remain poorly understood.

The federal government’s push to schedule 7-OH has sparked mixed reactions. Some health experts believe that overdosing and adverse effects are not yet widespread enough to warrant strict scheduling, which could hinder research efforts. Conversely, advocates and industry groups argue that the move is influenced by market competition and may unfairly target kratom producers. Public health officials express concern over the rising use of kratom and 7-OH among teenagers and young adults, especially since these products are often flavored, attractively packaged, and available at convenience outlets with minimal age verification.

Legislation across various states reflects this evolving landscape, with recent laws raising minimum purchase ages, banning synthetic kratom products, or regulating packaging and labeling. States such as Louisiana and Rhode Island have enacted bans or regulatory frameworks, and others like Colorado, Mississippi, and New York are considering tighter restrictions. These developments highlight the increasing efforts to balance the potential medicinal benefits of kratom against its health risks, especially given the growing market for 7-OH-containing products.

In conclusion, regulatory authorities are intensifying their focus on kratom and its derivatives. While the natural plant remains accessible in many areas, the pending scheduling of 7-OH signifies a possible tightening of control that could impact consumers and the industry. Continued research and clearer federal guidelines are crucial for understanding and managing the risks associated with these substances.