4 ms·
That's a fair argument, but it's impossible for me to compare them because there's no data on how many people use kratom. I'm not saying it's less dangerous tha
by jmcgough 10y ago
That's a fair argument, but it's impossible for me to compare them because there's no data on how many people use kratom. I'm not saying it's less dangerous than NSAIDs necessarily, as kratom is poorly researched at this point. What I'm trying to say is that we allow people to freely use NSAIDs in spite of the regular death that they cause, because of the benefits they provide. I don't see what makes kratom any different from that - it seems like a knee-jerk reaction in the middle of an opiate epidemic, just because it seems to be agonistic.
- exelius 10y agoRight; there has to be a middle ground between "zero regulation" and "total prohibition". Schedule 1 classification effectively prevents research, which is a bad idea. But likewise, no regulation means this stuff will start showing up in bodegas with all sorts of claims attached to it and very little quality control -- a bad idea for a substance that is known to be capable of causing death in large quantities. There has to be a middle ground.