Six years ago, Lowndes County enacted a ban on the sale of kratom throughout the county. At the time, it was the sixth Mississippi county to ban kratom sales.

Since then, nine other counties have passed ordinances banning the sale of kratom. In addition, 32 Mississippi cities have outlawed its sale.

The city of Starkville is currently considering a ban, too. Tuesday, the city held its first public meeting on the topic. Residents both in favor of and opposed to the ban spoke, which pretty much mirrors the national debate.

One person said kratom ruined her life. Another said it saved hers. There’s no reason to believe that either is being dishonest. See the problem?

Those who believe kratom sales should be legal say it is successful in managing pain and argue that a ban would entice people to use more dangerous, illicit substances.

Those who favor the ban say that since kratom acts on opioid receptors, it can lead to addiction. Critics also point to reports of liver toxicity, seizures and respiratory issues in cases where kratom is used. Finally, they argue, due to the lack of federal oversight, many products sold in gas stations or online have been found to contain harmful contaminants like lead or even salmonella.

It seems reasonable to us to believe any substance that treats pain has the potential for abuse. It’s a matter of where that threshold lies.

The question becomes: At what point are local governments compelled to intervene as a matter of public health?

States that have passed laws governing kratom sales are divided into two groups. Some states have completely banned sales by scheduling it as a Schedule I drug. In fact, Lowndes County legislators introduced Schedule 1 legislation in 2018 (House) and 2019 (Senate) but neither bill ever came to the floor for a vote.

Alabama, Arkansas, Indiana, Vermont and Wisconsin have banned kratom sales by classifying it as a Schedule 1 drug.

Five other states, including Mississippi, have chosen the regulation approach, primarily by banning the sale of synthetic kratom, which is more potent and more likely to contain contaminants than the whole leaf form that has been used for centuries as a pain reliever in Southeast Asia.

To a great degree, the continuing debate over kratom can be attributed to a lack of guidance at the federal level.

The FDA has expressed concern about kratom but admits there are inadequate scientific data to prove whether or not it is safe for medical use. It was the same story when Lowndes County tackled the kratom issue six years ago. Have we really learned nothing since then? By now, there should be sufficient evidence to make a clear decision showing whether kratom is a legitimate pain reliever or a dangerous and addictive drug.

The federal government has passed the buck. It remains federally legal and unregulated.

Logic should dictate that kratom be one or the other. It should not be both.

Make it illegal everywhere or carefully regulated everywhere.

Until then, in cities and counties across the country it remains largely a matter of which side argues its position most effectively while relying almost entirely on anecdotal evidence.

That’s a poor way to determine public health policy.

The Dispatch Editorial Board is made up of publisher Peter Imes, columnist Slim Smith, managing editor Zack Plair and senior newsroom staff.

READER FAVORITES

• 

  Roses and Thorns: 6-13-26

  By Dispatch Editorial Board • 2 days ago