And they're trying the same thing with kratom: https://www.kratomutopia.org/real-reason-fda-targeting-krato...

The FDA/DEA war on Kratom is truly heinous. The worst part is certain media outlets (like USA Today) are happy to regurgitate FDA propaganda without even mentioning the counter arguments. There are a few articles I see in other outlets that are fair, but more often than not it's the government-approved line.

Kratom is addictive and you can overdose on it, neither of which is generally considered true for cannabis. It seems odd to mention both in the same breath.

You can not over dose on kratom. You'll become nauseous and throw up long before reaching a toxic level. It is addictive tho. But so is caffeine, and even sugar, but nobody wants to ban those.

This is also similar to marijuana IIRC. You pass out long before you're ever able to reach toxic levels of THC. I'm not sure how true this is though, only something I heard from someone in HS who was a massive stoner.

I don't see how you could possibly overdose on kratom - large doses make you sick (and when I say "large dose", I mean relative to a typical dose of 3-10g - which is nowhere near to an overdose). I don't have a source (on mobile), but I seem to recall reading that you'd need to eat something like a kg if kratom to overdose.

Both cannabis and kratom can be psychologically addictive, in the same way as anything "rewarding" can be.

As kratom contains opioids, it might also cause physical dependence. I say might, as mitragynine is not a typical opioid, in that it doesn't recruit beta-arresting - which is thought to be responsible for the build up of tolerance and dependence by opioids, as well as for some of the negative side effects, such as respiratory depression.

There are many conflicting anecdotal reports claiming that kratom does cause withdrawal on abstinence, or does not. Personally, I have previously been able to stop kratom multiple times with no withdrawal at all (which has certainly not been the case with my prescribed opioid meds). My guess is there may be genetic factors at play here, and of course as a natural product there are bound to be variations in chemical composition of kratom from different sources.

Meh. Show me credible data on actual overdoses. The addictive potential is definitely there but is present elsewhere and otherwise accepted.

And for when it is in an addictive context, is it merely replacing an unhealthier habit with a more benign one?

A close friend of mine who suffered from a severe autoimmune disorder was unable to receive proper care from literally dozens of different doctors over the course of fifteen years of suffering. No experts could provide a useful diagnosis or safe drugs to treat symptoms. It was either tramadol and other potent narcotics or immunosuppressants, which have severe side effects.

Kratom was one of the only medicines that allowed him to function and it was getting more difficult to reliably source due to regulatory pressure.

He died abruptly 3 months ago due to rapidly progressing infection secondary to immunosuppressant / chemotherapy drugs prescribed to help him control symptoms.

He was 34.

Pay attention to the FDA's leadership. It's a revolving door with industry. Access to safe, effective medicine is not the FDA's goal in practice.

I'm torn between the need for effective regulation and the often dysfunctional real-world implementation of those controls.

Culturally, scientifically sanctioned pharmaceuticals are usually the only option provided to patients who are left to either seek alternative therapies or become dependent on treatments that often do not improve their well-being. "Non-traditional" medicine is often demonized as anti-science and lumped together with nonsense like homeopathy despite long successful histories in folk medicine.

This is unfortunate, because I believe that by treating medicines outside the mainstream -- medicines that are widely accessible, sometimes illegal, but primarily are not commercially viable (and thus are excluded from much scientific research) -- as akin to snake-oil means that a large and growing body of people are susceptible to things like anti-vaccination silliness. "Correct think" -- a culture of fetishism of scientific expertise that isn't actually scientifically motivated -- is responsible, in my opinion, for reactionary movements that are harmful to everyone. We live an an age of a narrow definition of scientific and off-load our critical thinking to experts who, in the best case, do not have the resources or data to look beyond the recommendations they learn in medical school, or in the worst case, produce phony medical trial results that exaggerate benefits and overlook harm. I would call it scientific myopia, but it's a cultural illness and not a problem particular to science.

It's possible to approach non-mainstream medicine rationally and not be casting bones in search of omens. But not according to our current cultural outlook.