6 ms·

The main points the DEA brought up in the notice are A.) Foreigners don't label their kratom correctly when they export it to the US. B.) Calls to a poison co

The main points the DEA brought up in the notice are A.) Foreigners don't label their kratom correctly when they export it to the US. B.) Calls to a poison control center involving kratom have spiked by a factor of 10 in the past few years. C.) Foreigners are exporting medical products that make claims not validated by the FDA. It's being placed in Schedule I rather than more permissive classification because (according to the notice) "A substance meeting the statutory requirements for temporary scheduling, 21 U.S.C. 811(h)(1), may only be placed in schedule I". It seems unlikely it'd be classified as Schedule I permanently. Drug use can be a matter of national security, so the DEA should have the power to act in these cases. I'm thinking of the Opium Wars, where the British got the Chinese hooked on opium and then went to war to force them to legalize it when they banned it. Widespread drug use being imposed by foreigners can harm a country. I'm not sure this kratom qualifies. It doesn't seem that bad. I can see banning imports and production for foreigners, but I can't see a good reason to ban US citizens conducting research on the drug. It seems like it's only like this because of the restrictive law. And if the manufacture, sale, and consumption happens entirely in a single state by US citizens who are residents of that state, I don't even think the DEA should be constitutionally allowed to regulate it on a permanent basis. On the whole, I guess I support this ban, though they should amend the law to allow a milder response.

facetube 10y ago
The labelling subterfuge started when the FDA started seizing properly-labelled shipments. Broken feedback loops, forever.
brandoncordell 10y ago
> Calls to a poison control center involving kratom have spiked by a factor of 10 in the past few years. 660 calls to poison control over a 6+ year span does not sound like an "imminent public health risk" to me. > It seems unlikely it'd be classified as Schedule I permanently. Worked well for Marijuana's temporary scheduling.
- MichaelBurge 10y ago
  > Worked well for Marijuana's temporary scheduling. Are you saying that this same process has been used to permanently classify Marijuana as schedule I? That means you're implicitly claiming a few things: * That the DEA issued a temporary classification on Marijuana that would've expired after 2 years. * That the DEA has the power to - by itself - schedule a drug permanently. (If it went through Congress, that's a different process) * That the DEA has the power to schedule Marijuana freely. In particular, there are no treaties forcing it to be classified a certain way. * That the DEA used its power to freely classify Marijuana, and chose to label it as schedule I. (As a consequence, they could relabel it at any time.) I don't know the history of marijuana or which of these is true or not. If all true, I'd like to see a different government agency do the classification(maybe the FDA? or some Congressional committee?) and the DEA do the enforcement.

facetube 10y ago

The labelling subterfuge started when the FDA started seizing properly-labelled shipments. Broken feedback loops, forever.

brandoncordell 10y ago

> Calls to a poison control center involving kratom have spiked by a factor of 10 in the past few years. 660 calls to poison control over a 6+ year span does not sound like an "imminent public health risk" to me. > It seems unlikely it'd be classified as Schedule I permanently. Worked well for Marijuana's temporary scheduling.

MichaelBurge 10y ago
> Worked well for Marijuana's temporary scheduling. Are you saying that this same process has been used to permanently classify Marijuana as schedule I? That means you're implicitly claiming a few things: * That the DEA issued a temporary classification on Marijuana that would've expired after 2 years. * That the DEA has the power to - by itself - schedule a drug permanently. (If it went through Congress, that's a different process) * That the DEA has the power to schedule Marijuana freely. In particular, there are no treaties forcing it to be classified a certain way. * That the DEA used its power to freely classify Marijuana, and chose to label it as schedule I. (As a consequence, they could relabel it at any time.) I don't know the history of marijuana or which of these is true or not. If all true, I'd like to see a different government agency do the classification(maybe the FDA? or some Congressional committee?) and the DEA do the enforcement.