Banning the kratom plant won’t protect children

Kimberly Fletcher

Submitted photo/InsideSources

This issue is not about choosing between prohibition and unrestricted access. It is about recognizing that a natural botanical product and a synthetic intoxicant are not the same thing and should not be treated as though they are. I want my children protected from companies that profit by marketing potent synthetic products to young people.”

Tell Us What You Think

What are your thoughts on availability to teenagers of kratom products, also known as 7-hydroxymitragynine and 7-OH? Tell us in 300 words or less at yourvalley.net/letters, or email your comments, name, address and contact number to AzOpinions@iniusa.org.

OPINION — I want my children to grow up in a world where products marketed to them are safe, honestly labeled and held to meaningful standards. I also want lawmakers to address emerging threats before they become public health crises.

That is why we must have an honest conversation about the growing market for synthetic 7-hydroxymitragynine products and why simply banning kratom is the wrong solution. 

Nationwide, highly concentrated and synthetic 7-OH products are rapidly appearing in gasoline stations, smoke shops and online marketplaces. Many come in bright colors, candy-like branding and marketing that appeals to younger consumers. They are often promoted for their intoxicating effects, not as traditional botanical products. 

As parents, we’ve seen this story before. The illegal Chinese vape epidemic showed how quickly unregulated products can flood the marketplace while regulators struggle to keep pace. We have watched intoxicating products packaged to resemble children’s snacks. We have seen companies exploit loopholes faster than lawmakers can close them. 

We should not wait for another crisis before acting. If lawmakers simply ban kratom, they risk making the problem worse. Natural kratom is a plant. Millions of responsible adults use traditional kratom products, and many rely on them as part of their daily wellness routines. Synthetic 7-OH products are something entirely different. They are often manufactured through chemical processes or highly concentrated far beyond what naturally occurs in the kratom leaf, creating products that bear little resemblance to the plant itself. 

If natural kratom is prohibited without specifically addressing synthetic 7-OH and its derivatives, legitimate kratom products disappear but the manufacturers producing synthetic copycat products can simply reformulate, rebrand or change an ingredient while continuing to market intoxicating products under different names. 

We have seen this pattern repeatedly with designer drugs and other emerging substances. 

Banning the natural plant while allowing synthetic imitators to evolve is not consumer protection. It gifts companies that exploit regulatory loopholes. Instead, lawmakers should focus enforcement on where the greatest risks exist. 

Synthetic and highly concentrated 7-OH products, and their derivatives, should be appropriately scheduled to prevent manufacturers from continuing to create increasingly potent intoxicating compounds designed to evade regulation. At the same time, natural kratom should remain available under strong consumer protections modeled after the Kratom Consumer Protection Act. 

The Kratom Consumer Protection Act offers a practical framework that requires accurate labeling, independent testing, manufacturing standards, restrictions on sales to minors, and protection against adulterated products. These safeguards help consumers identify legitimate products while removing dangerous actors from the marketplace. 

We should also be asking another important question: Why are intoxicating products being designed and marketed in ways that appeal to children? 

Whether through colorful packaging, social-media advertising, sweet flavors or branding that resembles familiar consumer products, companies should never be permitted to target young people with products capable of causing intoxication. Responsible businesses have nothing to fear from regulations that prohibit youth marketing and require honest labeling. Those are the protections families deserve. 

This issue is not about choosing between prohibition and unrestricted access. It is about recognizing that a natural botanical product and a synthetic intoxicant are not the same thing and should not be treated as though they are. 

I want my children protected from companies that profit by marketing potent synthetic products to young people. As a citizen, I want laws that target the real problem instead of creating unintended consequences. 

We can do both. 

By scheduling synthetic 7-OH and its derivatives while preserving regulated access to natural kratom through the Kratom Consumer Protection Act, lawmakers can protect children, support responsible businesses and close the loopholes that bad actors continue to exploit. Good policy protects families. Great policy protects families without sacrificing common sense. 

Kimberly Fletcher is president of Moms for America. She wrote this for InsideSources.com. Please submit comments at yourvalley.net/letters or email them to AzOpinions@iniusa.org. We are committed to publishing a wide variety of reader opinions, as long as they meet our Civility Guidelines.