CONNECTICUT COMMITTEE APPROVES PLAN TO MAKE KRATOM A SCHEDULED SUBSTANCE

As more states across the country listen to the science and back reasonable kratom regulations, lawmakers in Connecticut followed through on a plan to criminalize consumers. 

A process that started last September came to a close in February when Connecticut’s Legislative Regulation Review Committee (LRRC) finalized a set of regulations that made all forms of kratom Schedule I substances in the state. Although the law was originally framed as cannabis regulations and changes to pharmacy practices, part of the legislation gave the Department of Consumer Protection (DCP) the power to schedule a set of substances that were unregulated in Connecticut. 

The DCP announced plans to place kratom in Schedule I late last year, and those plans were ratified by a 14-0 vote of the LRRC at a meeting on Feb. 24. 

Legislating with a Broad Brush

That decision makes it a crime to buy, sell or even possess kratom in the state, despite prevailing scientific evidence and a change of stance from federal regulators. Advocates for kratom urged lawmakers to change course, but in the end, it was the voices pushing prohibition that won out over the idea of reasonable regulation of the plant. 

“Today’s vote in the Regulation Review Committee to classify kratom as a Schedule I controlled substance was a difficult, but necessary, step to protect public health, especially the safety of children and young people who should not have legal access to a highly potent and unregulated drug," said Rep. Mary Welander, the ranking member of the LRRC. 

In total, the list of substances scheduled by the DCP included both mitragynine, the primary alkaloid in natural kratom, and 7-hydroxymitragynine (7-OH). That decision ignored updated guidance by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which made a clear differentiation between natural leaf kratom and products with elevated levels of 7-OH. 

Instead of considering the two alkaloids separately, DCP decided to lump the two alkaloids associated with kratom alongside five other unrelated compounds in the list of additions to Schedule I in Connecticut. 

“These substances pose a significant public health risk, particularly to children, as they have been widely available for purchase by people of all ages, with no regulation, testing, or other public health protections,” said DCP Commissioner Bryan Cafferelli. 

A majority of the legislators who spoke up in support of scheduling kratom also referenced public safety and protecting children. What wasn’t mentioned was the idea of regulating kratom, similar to legislation that has been passed in other states across the country. 

Reconsidering Regulations

Although there was no direct mention of regulation, some on the LRRC did explore revisiting the decision down the road. 

Sen. John Kissel was one of those voices that questioned the broad approach to scheduling all forms of kratom. Kissel informed the committee that his limited research on the subject made him cautious about lumping all kratom products in with each other. 

“There seems to be one that grows in the wild… and then there is one that is produced by chemical formation. The second one seems to be much more dangerous than the more natural one,” Kissel said. “My predisposition is not to say that everything that doesn’t have a battery of medical tests should be (Schedule I). Maybe down the road we can reconsider this issue.”

Sen. Cathy Osten echoed Kissel’s reservations and further questioned DCP regulators about the FDA’s stance. Officials from DCP correctly identified that 7-OH is a naturally occurring alkaloid in the kratom plant, but did not clarify what the FDA has made clear: 7-OH occurs in trace amounts in natural kratom leaf and products with artificially elevated levels of 7-OH are the ones that pose a public health risk. 

Osten said that she had heard from constituents who had raised concerns about lumping all kratom products together. As more states across the country opt for regulation over prohibition, Osten said she was concerned about how the committee's decision could impact residents. “I just think that sometimes we overproject our opinions on some things, and I’m concerned about that,” Osten said. “Our neighbors are not doing this, and it seems like we’ll be an island again in the overregulation of this issue.” 

One topic that was discussed at length during the hearing was the concept of testing and making a distinction between natural leaf kratom and synthetically altered products being sold as kratom. 

Representatives from the DCP testified that state labs do not currently have the testing capabilities to differentiate between natural kratom products and those that are artificially enhanced. Those comments led the legislators on the committee to operate under the assumption that testing does not exist to establish whether a kratom product is natural or artificially enhanced. 

In reality, other states have passed legislation to require lab testing of regulated kratom products and set specific limits on the amount of 7-OH in an approved product. Instead of discussing the possibility of regulation, the LRRC instead put off the topic until “testing is available” and opted to make all kratom products Schedule I in the state. 

The DCP’s decision means that kratom consumers in Connecticut will need the legislature to make a new law, or else require changes at the federal level to automatically trigger a change to the state’s stance on kratom.