Kratom, a botanical product derived from the leaves of the Southeast Asian tree Mitragyna speciosa, has seen a surge in popularity across the United States. While some hail its potential for pain relief and support in opioid withdrawal, concerns about its safety and lack of regulation have prompted calls for legislative action. In New York, a bipartisan group of lawmakers is leading the charge to introduce safeguards for consumers, reflecting a broader national debate about how best to manage this complex substance.
Kratom’s Rise and the Case for Regulation
Until recently, kratom was largely unknown outside Southeast Asia. In the U.S., it is now widely available in smoke shops, gas stations, and online. Many users are drawn to kratom for its purported benefits: relief from chronic pain, help with sleep, and assistance with opioid withdrawal. However, as Assemblywoman Mary Beth Walsh highlighted in her recent opinion piece, the lack of regulation has led to tragic outcomes, including deaths linked to kratom-related side effects such as aspiration and overdose.
Understanding the Risks
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has repeatedly warned the public about the dangers associated with kratom. According to the FDA and Kratom resource, kratom is not lawfully marketed in the U.S. as a drug, dietary supplement, or food additive. The FDA has documented risks such as liver toxicity, seizures, hallucinations, substance use disorder, and, in rare cases, death. In 2022, the American Association of Poison Control Centers reported more than 1,200 kratom-related incidents, with over half requiring medical attention.
One high-profile case involved the product OPMS Black Liquid Kratom, which the FDA linked to one death and numerous adverse health effects, including addiction, digestive issues, and anxiety. The FDA has not approved any prescription or over-the-counter drugs containing kratom’s active compounds, mitragynine and 7-hydroxymitragynine, and maintains “serious safety concerns” about their use.
The Regulatory Patchwork
Kratom’s legal status is inconsistent across the U.S. Six states-Alabama, Arkansas, Indiana, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Wisconsin-have banned it entirely. Others have implemented local measures, such as labeling requirements and age restrictions, but there is no uniform national standard. In New York, some counties have taken action, but statewide regulation remains absent.
This patchwork approach has led to confusion and gaps in consumer protection. Products are often marketed as “all-natural” or “herbal supplements,” which can mislead consumers into believing they are safe. Without regulations on manufacturing, labeling, or sales, there is no guarantee of product purity, potency, or safety.
New York’s Legislative Response
Recognizing these risks, Assemblywoman Walsh and her colleagues have introduced a legislative package to regulate kratom in New York:
-
A.5852 would require kratom products to carry warning labels stating they are not FDA-approved and listing possible side effects, from nausea to liver damage and death. It would also prohibit marketing processed kratom products as “all natural.”
-
A.2340 would make it illegal to sell kratom to anyone under 21, with civil penalties for violations.
-
A.4034 would classify kratom as a Schedule I controlled substance in New York, putting it on par with substances that have high abuse potential and no accepted medical use.
Even if the entire package does not pass, lawmakers argue that age restrictions and clear labeling are essential first steps. As Walsh notes, “We regulate alcohol, cannabis, tobacco and other substances because we recognize the risks they pose. Kratom should be no different.”
The Dangers of Unregulated Products
The FDA has raised alarms about kratom products contaminated with pathogens or heavy metals. In 2018, the agency issued a recall after kratom was linked to a multi-state Salmonella outbreak. Testing has also found some products contain dangerous levels of heavy metals, which can cause long-term health issues.
Furthermore, the lack of standardization means that potency and purity vary widely between products. Some kratom sold in the U.S. is adulterated with other substances, increasing the risk of unpredictable effects or overdose. As the FDA issues warnings to companies selling illegal, unapproved kratom drug products details, many vendors make unsubstantiated claims about kratom’s ability to treat pain, opioid withdrawal, or other medical conditions, which can mislead vulnerable consumers.
Balancing Consumer Choice and Public Health
Advocates for regulation emphasize that the goal is not to ban kratom outright but to ensure that consumers make informed choices. By establishing clear guidelines on age restrictions, product labeling, and quality standards, lawmakers can protect vulnerable populations-such as minors and those with underlying health issues-while allowing responsible adults to access kratom for legitimate purposes.
The American Kratom Association and other industry groups have supported efforts to standardize kratom products and improve transparency. They argue that regulation, not prohibition, is the best path forward to ensure both safety and access.
Moving Forward
As kratom’s popularity grows, so does the urgency for sensible, evidence-based regulation. New York’s proposed legislative package represents a pragmatic approach, focusing on transparency and consumer protection rather than outright prohibition. By learning from other states and incorporating expert input, New York can set a standard for responsible kratom policy.
For those who use kratom or are considering it, understanding the risks and seeking products from reputable sources is crucial. Open conversations-especially between parents and young people-can help prevent harm. As Assemblywoman Walsh urges, “If you or someone you love uses kratom, please understand the risks. If you’re a parent, talk to your kids about it. And if you’re a New Yorker who believes in consumer safety, I urge you to support this legislation.”
The debate over kratom is ultimately about balancing individual autonomy with public health responsibilities. Proactive regulation is not about limiting freedom, but about ensuring safety, transparency, and public trust.