Tell me about Kratom Tea

[KidCharlemagne]

@Jackmannii

C’mon, you’ve said he was “going after” kratom owing to a “conflict of interest”; your implication is that the FDA’s concerns about false marketing and abuse are just because their former chief was a “toadie” for Big Pharma (not borne out by his performance at the agency).
Such allegations require evidence, not conspiratorial hand-waving. And you’d still have to explain why other health agencies and physicians have serious concerns about lack of efficacy and harm (including reported deaths, and kratom users showing up in ERs with withdrawal symptoms).

My take on kratom is pretty much the same as with all supplements (which are basically unregulated, thus prone to mislabeling/adulteration/contamination/bogus claims). Health claims should be backed by solid evidence, without which the stuff shouldn’t be on the market.

There seem to be plenty of “hippy-types” (to use the OP’s phrase) looking to score big money off users. Personally I’d feel uneasy about facilitating their ride to riches, even if I thought it probably wouldn’t come back to bite me in a legal sense.

Now you’re going after kratom’s efficacy?

Read:

Study Pokes Holes in Kratom’s ‘Bad Rap’

[Jackmannii]

From your link: “There is a clear need for more rigorous, well-controlled, prospective studies to support a sophisticated, nuanced understanding of the plant,” said Swogger."

Nowhere in that story do I see anyone arguing that kratom should be legal for sale everywhere by any supplement dealer without a guarantee of content or purity, and that sellers should be able to make any claims they want.

If you lined up all the drugs that were felt at some point to have potential but never panned out or had serious limitations that precluded their use, you’d have a hell of a long line of drugs.