Kratom Consumers Deserve the Truth: Why Labeling Matters for Public Safety
Last week, Dr. Paloma Lehfeldt, MD, published an opinion piece stating that my bill (a5852a), which would enforce the labeling for kratom products, will “mislead consumers, burden responsible manufacturers, and unintentionally drive safe, natural kratom out of the market”. With all due respect to Dr. Lehfeldt, this argument is preposterous and is the same argument that Tobacco companies made against the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act in 1965.
In February, my office was contacted by Assemblymember Mary Beth Walsh (R-112th AD) after a constituent of hers, Nick Scribner, a 27-year-old resident of Ballston Spa, passed away from self-medicating with Kratom. When I met with Assemblymember Walsh and Nick’s mother, Cari Scribner, she shared with us that Nick purchased a product online that was advertised as “100% natural kratom” to help with insomnia. Despite the product being advertised as a natural kratom product, Nick passed away in his sleep after taking the product.
Because of Nick Scribner’s death, Assemblymember Walsh and I introduced bipartisan legislation that would require all kratom products to have a warning label informing consumers that kratom is not FDA-approved and has numerous harmful side effects (a5852a). This legislation garnered broad support and passed both the Assembly and Senate unanimously.
While Dr. Lehfeldt is correct that the kratom leaf grown in Southeast Asia has been used for centuries, this is not the same product that is being sold online or in gas stations. Instead, these products contain extremely potent kratom that is technically “natural” because it is derived from the leaf. This is similar in nature to cocaine. While the coca leaf has been grown and chewed for centuries, when formulated into cocaine, it undergoes a manufacturing process that makes the coca leaf more potent.
The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has not approved any use of kratom, even the 100% natural leaf kratom. The FDA has warned consumers against it and stated that kratom has harmful side effects, including but not limited to nausea, aggression, hallucinations, troubled breathing, liver damage, and death¹. Because kratom is not FDA-approved, consumers are entitled to know that the product they are purchasing has side effects and does not have a medical use. Adding a warning label to kratom products is no different than the warning labels on alcohol and tobacco.
I often hear from those in the kratom industry, like Dr. Lehfeldt, that they are for consumer transparency, but they do not like the transparency our bill provides. They point to the so-called Kratom Consumer Protection Act as the answer. The only labeling that the Kratom Consumer Protection Act provides is that kratom may be habit-forming and that kratom is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease. It does not require kratom products to warn of the harmful side effects or that it could result in death.
When those in the kratom industry say my bill will mislead consumers, what they truly mean is that if consumers learn about the side effects of kratom, they will not buy the product. Thus, the industry will lose money.
Another counterpoint that is often raised against the labeling bill is that it paints all kratom with a broad brush and it will hurt the “good actors” in the industry. They claim that the only “bad actors” in the industry are those who manufacture their products with 7-hydroxymitragynine (7-OH). 7-OH is 13 times more potent than morphine, making it one of the most naturally occurring opioid-like compounds. The side effects of 7-OH include addiction, anxiety, depression, seizures, and severe withdrawal. Like Dr. Lehfeldt, on September 22nd, Dr. Michael White, a department head at the University of Connecticut School of Pharmacy and chair of the Kratom Consumer Advisory Council, recommended that New York State ban 7-OH on an episode of the Capitol Pressroom².
While I never accept the good-actors-versus-bad-actors argument, I agree with Dr. Lehfeldt and Dr. White that New York State should ban 7-OH products. I recently introduced another piece of legislation with Assemblymember Walsh that would prohibit the sale of all products containing 7-OH (a9156).
I am hopeful that the kratom industry will put their money where their mouth is and join us in prohibiting 7-OH products in New York State. We will see whether they are for protecting consumers, as they claim, or for protecting the almighty dollar.
Assemblymember Phil Steck represents New York’s 110th District.
