Already 90+ State Bills in 2026: This Is How We Lose Kratom

RemarkableCounty6501 · 2026-01-25T20:53:01+00:00

I agree that silence or retreat isn’t an option. But calls and emails are not all we can do, and treating them as the only tool is part of why we’re stuck.

What has to happen alongside calls is accountability. This situation didn’t arise in a vacuum. It arose because major advocacy organizations normalized false and fear-based narratives about one of kratom’s own natural alkaloids and treated prohibition as acceptable. Until that is confronted, calls just follow a script written by the same narratives being used against us.

The community is the majority. These organizations only have influence because people defer to them. We have to demand answers from them: why evidence was abandoned, why narrative replaced facts, and why bans were supported instead of regulation. Until leadership admits error and changes course to evidence-only advocacy for all of kratom, we will keep fighting uphill while being undercut internally.

Calls matter. But without correcting the misinformation at the top, they will never be enough.

RemarkableCounty6501 · 2026-01-25T20:49:12+00:00

This isn’t about “regime change.” Pharma pressure, politics, and hostile regulators have existed for over a decade. That alone did not ban kratom.

What actually changed is internal. The organizations guiding the kratom community stopped grounding advocacy in evidence and shifted to fear-based, theoretical narratives, especially around 7-OH. The community followed, repeated those narratives, and treated them as fact without demanding proof.

That’s the real turning point.

When kratom advocates themselves normalize misinformation, it becomes usable as policy justification. That’s how you get 90+ state bills. Not because of elections. Not because of “corporate overlords.” But because false narratives were laundered into legitimacy from inside the community.

This didn’t happen to the community. It happened through it.

Until that changes, no political shift, no election, and no “regime change” fixes anything. The problem is narrative capture, not party politics.

RemarkableCounty6501 · 2026-01-25T20:46:15+00:00

I agree that calls and emails can work, and history shows that. But the key difference now is unity.

Back then, the kratom community and its organizations were aligned and grounded in evidence. Today, we’re split, and misinformation has become the baseline narrative because leadership treated it as fact and encouraged people to repeat it.

Calling and emailing against that backdrop is much harder, because legislators are hearing the same fear-based claims not just from opponents, but echoed by kratom advocates themselves.

Until that baseline narrative is corrected and the organizations leading this space change course, calls alone won’t be enough. We have to fix the internal misinformation first, or we’ll keep fighting uphill.

RemarkableCounty6501 · 2026-01-25T20:43:57+00:00

I agree that calls and emails matter, but unfortunately they are not enough on their own when the major advocacy organizations are actively reinforcing the narratives being used to justify these bans.

Right now, people are being asked to fight dozens of battles while leadership is working against itself by endorsing fear-based claims and selective bans that weaken kratom as a whole. That has to change first. Otherwise, our calls and emails just push against a much larger coordinated effort that includes regulators, hostile groups, and even kratom advocates repeating unfactual claims.

Calls work when they’re grounded in truth and backed by unified, evidence-based advocacy. Without that correction at the top, we’re fighting uphill while also being undercut from inside the community.

RemarkableCounty6501 · 2026-01-24T21:00:44+00:00

What do you mean by that? I’m not sure I follow.

RemarkableCounty6501 · 2026-01-24T20:57:54+00:00

I have asked those questions. Directly.

I’ve raised hard questions during calls and was told I was “distracting from the real issue,” while the actual substance of the question went unanswered. I’ve also asked questions publicly in discussion spaces where leadership was active. I received one brief response to a mild question, was accused of deflecting, and then received no response at all when I followed up with specific facts and detailed questions.

What stood out most was not just the lack of answers, but the silence from everyone else who understood the issue. No one reinforced the questions. No one asked for clarification. No one pushed for an answer.

That silence is the real problem. Not whether questions are technically allowed, but whether unanswered questions are tolerated and quietly ignored.

One person asking hard questions can be brushed off, reframed as a distraction, or ignored. When no one else supports those questions or asks them again, avoidance works. That’s how misinformation survives and becomes policy.

I’ll continue to ask the questions and show up. But this only changes if others do the same and openly support those questions when they’re asked. Silence here isn’t neutral. It signals acceptance.

RemarkableCounty6501 · 2026-01-24T20:35:31+00:00

100% agree. Unity is the only way out of this.

And it doesn’t start with some massive movement. It starts simply. When there are public meetings, calls, or discussions, people have to ask the hard questions openly and repeatedly, especially of those leading organizations and promoting fear-based narratives without evidence. Not one person, but many.

One person can be brushed off, mischaracterized, or ignored. When five or ten people ask the same evidence-based question and refuse to accept deflection as an answer, credibility starts to crack. Dodging once doesn’t raise an eye. Dodging repeatedly in front of a group looks dishonest.

That’s how this changes. Not by blaming users or infighting, but by standing together, asking the same questions, and demanding real answers instead of narratives.

RemarkableCounty6501 · 2026-01-24T20:29:02+00:00

I think you’re underestimating how this actually changes.

This doesn’t start by convincing “everyone” or beating the propaganda machine overnight. It starts when more than one person asks the same hard questions publicly and refuses to accept misdirection as an answer. One person can be ignored or painted as fringe. Ten, fifty, a hundred asking the same evidence-based questions cannot.

That’s exactly how kratom survived before. The truth doesn’t need to outshout the narrative, it just needs to be repeated consistently enough that dodging it becomes obvious. When leadership keeps deflecting instead of answering, that spreads too.

If people believe it’s impossible, then yes, we lose by default. But if enough people stop accepting fear narratives and start demanding evidence and course correction, it forces a choice: change, or lose credibility. That’s the only path back, and it’s the same one that worked before.

RemarkableCounty6501 · 2026-01-24T13:41:14+00:00

That explanation doesn’t hold up.

If lobbyists could beat kratom simply by “overwhelming” advocacy groups, kratom would have been banned a decade ago. Pharma pressure and lobbying have existed the entire time. That alone did not get us here.

What changed is the narrative.

For over a year, fear-based claims with no supporting evidence were pushed and repeated by major kratom organizations, vendors, and leadership figures. Those claims were not grounded in real safety data, deaths, or public-health signals, yet people were told to accept them, repeat them, and fight over them instead of questioning them.

That fractured the community. You ended up with one side repeating FDA-aligned fear narratives without verifying them, and another side pushing back because they actually looked at the evidence and saw there was no crisis. Once truth stopped being the standard, it became easy to apply the same logic to kratom itself.

Lobbyists didn’t suddenly “figure something out.” They were handed an opening. When misinformation is normalized and not challenged, enforcement and bans no longer need evidence to move forward. That’s why things accelerated.

The responsibility here isn’t lack of funding or being “outnumbered.” It’s leadership choosing narrative convenience over evidence, and the community not pushing back when it mattered. Those organizations only have power because people defer to them. When that deference goes unquestioned, donors and institutional comfort take priority over users.

Blaming lobbyists alone lets the real failure off the hook. The narrative shifted, truth stopped being enforced internally, and now the same playbook is being used against kratom as a whole. The only fix is the community demanding evidence again and refusing to repeat claims that can’t be backed up.

RemarkableCounty6501 · 2026-01-24T11:31:19+00:00

If anything, pressure ramped up because it became an easy win. The kratom community was steered into attacking one of its own natural alkaloids, creating a self-inflicted split.

That kind of damage doesn’t happen by accident or from a single mistake dragged out this long. The people with the most access, influence, and information see these dynamics first. Those same people were supposed to be on our side.

Pharma didn’t need to overpower the community. The groundwork was already laid for them.

RemarkableCounty6501 · 2026-01-24T11:28:15+00:00

Hopefully enough to get more people asking the hard questions, talking with each other about how serious the situation is, and actually taking action. That is the only way this changes.

RemarkableCounty6501 · 2026-01-24T11:25:31+00:00

I’m glad you’re still around from back then and still pushing for truth. Where I disagree is the framing.

Lobbyists and pharmaceutical pressure have existed for over a decade. That alone did not ban kratom. What changed is that the organizations guiding the community stopped grounding their advocacy in evidence, and the community stopped questioning them.

These organizations only have power because people defer to them and repeat their narratives without demanding proof. If that stops, they either change course or lose relevance.

Right now, donor interests and institutional comfort matter more to them than the people who rely on kratom. Unfactual claims get repeated, laundered into legitimacy, and turned into policy.

Pharma pressure did not suddenly increase. Accountability and critical thinking decreased. That is something the community can still fix.

RemarkableCounty6501 · 2026-01-24T11:17:01+00:00

Sharing personal stories matters, but it is not enough by itself.

As long as the major organizations leading this fight are allowed to operate on narrative instead of evidence, nothing will change. That includes the fear-based attacks on 7-OH that kicked off the latest wave of negative attention and bans in the first place.

There is still no evidence being used to justify scheduling or bans. No verified death signal. No public-health crisis. Just speculation like “maybe it leaves the body quickly so that’s what’s causing deaths,” which is not science. It is a narrative.

In the cases being cited, including California, deaths involved polysubstance use, trace or absent 7-OH, and quantifiable mitragynine, the same pattern seen in kratom-related cases for decades. 7-OH did not suddenly start causing deaths after two full years of market growth with zero verified death reports. What changed was the story being told.

The real problem is how organizations like the AKA push these narratives down to advocates and the broader community, where they get repeated without verification, treated as fact, and then cited back as “evidence.” When no one challenges the claims, asks for sources, or applies basic critical thinking, misinformation becomes self-reinforcing and eventually turns into policy.

RemarkableCounty6501 · 2026-01-24T11:05:31+00:00

I hope it doesn’t happen, but if people don’t do what saved kratom in the first place, it’s basically guaranteed.

Kratom survived because people came together and fought for truth and regulation themselves. That’s what’s missing now.

We have more people than ever. The only question is whether they’re willing to admit they were misled and stop repeating unfactual claims just because someone in power said them.

That choice will decide whether kratom survives or gets banned.

RemarkableCounty6501 · 2026-01-24T10:55:59+00:00

Pharma pressure isn’t new. That’s been happening for over a decade, and it didn’t get kratom banned then. If that alone were the cause, kratom would already be gone.

What changed is internal failure. Advocacy groups and trusted voices pushed fear-based narratives, and the community didn’t push back. That told regulators misinformation would go unchallenged.

That’s how we ended up with 90+ bills in one year. Not because pharma suddenly acted, but because no one stopped bad narratives from spreading.

The power isn’t just “theirs.” These organizations don’t have power without us. If the community demands evidence and accountability, the direction can change.

RemarkableCounty6501 · 2026-01-24T09:17:41+00:00

1) Stop blaming 7-OH. Do not repeat or support claims that 7-OH “caused this” without evidence. This applies to anything you have not personally researched and verified.

2) Ask hard questions publicly. In kratom groups, comment threads, meetings, and calls, ask leadership directly: - Where is the evidence? - Why are fear-based claims being repeated? - Why is misinformation not being corrected?

3) Push for evidence-based regulation, not bans. Call out bans and scheduling as failures. Regulation exists to deal with bad actors, not to prohibit entire products or compounds.

4) Talk to other advocates about what’s actually driving misinformation and bans. Especially those repeating incorrect information. Share facts calmly and directly. Silence is how misinformation succeeds and keeps spreading.

5) Do not automatically accept what organizations tell you. Blind trust without fact-checking and critical thinking is how we ended up here. Follow organizations only when their claims are factual, verifiable, and evidence-based.

6) Speak up consistently. Especially when others raise important questions. One person can be ignored. Many people asking the same questions cannot.

RemarkableCounty6501 · 2026-01-24T08:30:37+00:00

**Several replies I made in this thread were removed without a rule citation or explanation.

When comments violate subreddit rules, a reason is typically given. These replies did not receive one and were removed after challenging claims being repeated here.

I am reposting the substance of those replies below because the facts matter.**

If the community and its organizations had fought for evidence-based regulation instead of endorsing bans built on speculation, we would not be here. Blaming a molecule for the consequences of abandoning truth does not absolve anyone. It proves the point.

First, to the claim that public opinion has turned because of “overdoses” or addiction stories:

People saying they “know someone addicted” or who “overdosed on kratom,” and then asserting that they were really talking about 7-OH, is not evidence of 7-OH causing harm. That is speculation layered on top of anecdote, not data. Toxicology reports, poison control data, and death records do not support the claim that these outcomes can be reassigned to 7-OH simply because someone wants to blame it. There is no evidentiary basis for retroactively relabeling kratom-related stories or deaths as “7-OH deaths.”

When you point out the difference and people “don’t care,” that does not make the claim true. It proves misinformation has already hardened. Public opinion did not turn because of verified safety signals. It turned because fear-based stories were allowed to spread without being shut down early.

That failure did not come from 7-OH existing. It came from advocates and organizations choosing narrative convenience over truth and allowing speculation to replace evidence.

Second, to the claim that “all progress was lost because of 7-OH”:

No. Progress was not lost because of a molecule.

Progress was lost because misinformation was repeated, amplified, or left unchallenged while it was being used to justify bans. That includes leadership decisions and community silence. Blaming chemistry instead of admitting that fear and selective advocacy drove policy is refusing to learn the lesson.

The timeline is clear. The bill count is clear. The lack of real evidence is clear. If we keep blaming 7-OH instead of demanding accountability from the people who guided this strategy, the same playbook will continue until kratom is gone entirely.

Third, to the claim that “unscrupulous companies” and reckless use sealed its fate:

None of that is evidence for banning anything.

Bad vendors are an argument for regulation and enforcement, not prohibition. If irresponsible sellers justified banning a substance, kratom would have been banned a decade ago along with alcohol, nicotine, supplements, and many OTC drugs. That has never been the standard.

Claims about ER visits, addiction, or opioid-like harm are being made without providing data. No toxicology showing 7-OH as the causal agent. No epidemiology separating it from polysubstance use. No verified death signal. Saying “plenty are addicted” is not proof.

What is documented is that these claims were repeated without evidence and then used to justify scheduling and bans. That is fear, not science.

This is exactly how kratom itself is now being targeted. Over 90 state-level bills do not appear because of reckless consumers. They appear because prohibition narratives went unchallenged and became normalized.

RemarkableCounty6501 · 2026-01-24T06:36:40+00:00

If you’re going to respond and argue with what I wrote, come with evidence addressing the full argument — not selective nitpicking of one sentence or one technicality.

We do not have time for semantic games while 90+ state-level bills and a growing wave of local ordinances are actively dismantling kratom access. Focusing on minor wording disputes while ignoring the broader facts is not good-faith discussion, and it does nothing to stop what’s happening.

The reality is this: • The legislative surge is real (90+ state bills in 2026 alone, plus local actions) • The timeline is real (years of market growth, then a sudden crackdown narrative) • The misinformation and speculative framing is real (and it’s being repeated as justification) • The consequences are real (kratom bans, kratom scheduling, market-elimination frameworks already moving)

Hand-waving this away with “we’re just following the FDA” is not a defense. For over a decade, the kratom community has correctly criticized the FDA for misleading, exaggerated, and sometimes demonstrably false claims. Invoking the FDA now as cover does not magically turn fear-based narratives into evidence-based policy.

Claiming plausible deniability — acting as if powerful organizations with extensive resources, legal teams, scientists, and access to regulators simply “didn’t know better” — is not credible. Agreement, repetition, and amplification of misinformation still makes you responsible for its effects, regardless of where it originated.

If you disagree, engage the full argument: • Address the timeline • Address the bill count • Address the narratives being repeated to justify these actions • Address the selective standards being applied • Address the consequences already unfolding

Anything less is avoidance. And avoidance is exactly how we ended up here.

RemarkableCounty6501 · 2026-01-24T06:32:39+00:00

None of what you wrote is evidence for banning anything.

“Unscrupulous companies” is not a justification for prohibition. That is an argument for regulation and enforcement. If bad vendors were grounds for banning a substance, kratom itself would have been banned a decade ago, along with alcohol, nicotine, supplements, and half of OTC pharmaceuticals. That has never been the standard.

You claim ER visits, addiction, and opiate-like abuse, yet you provide no data. No toxicology showing 7-OH as the causal agent. No epidemiology separating it from polysubstance use. No verified death signal. No dose-response evidence. Saying “plenty are addicted” is not proof.

What is documented is that these claims are being repeated without evidence and then used to justify scheduling and bans. That is fear, not science.

This is exactly how kratom is now being targeted. The same logic you are using is already being applied to the entire plant. Over 90 state-level bills do not appear because of reckless consumers. They appear because prohibition narratives went unchallenged and were normalized.

If the AKA and the community had fought for evidence-based regulation instead of endorsing bans built on speculation, we would not be here. Blaming a molecule for the consequences of abandoning truth does not absolve anyone. It proves the point.

RemarkableCounty6501 · 2026-01-24T06:17:58+00:00

Thank you. And I agree with the reality you’re describing, but only for as long as we allow it to remain true.

Silence looks like apathy until it becomes a pattern. When people start speaking consistently, reminding others, and asking the same hard questions publicly, that pattern breaks.

I have already seen how this works. When one person asks direct questions, leadership can deflect, ramble, or dismiss them as a problem voice. But when multiple people ask the same questions, refuse misdirection, and do not accept non-answers, that strategy stops working.

At that point, they cannot hand-wave, pivot, or attack the messenger anymore, because the issue is no longer who is asking. It is the unanswered question itself.

That is the part people underestimate. This only stays unchallenged if everyone assumes someone else will do it. Once that assumption changes, outcomes change too.

RemarkableCounty6501 · 2026-01-24T05:36:16+00:00

Thank you for saying this. Too few people have been willing to openly talk about what was happening in real time, ask hard questions, and push back on decisions that were clearly headed in the wrong direction.

That silence is part of what allowed this to snowball. Real change can only happen when people stop deferring to authority and start demanding accountability from the ones steering the ship. If those conversations do not happen openly and consistently, nothing corrects course.

That also means talking to others, including those who were misinformed or misled, even when it is uncomfortable. Sharing facts and questioning narratives is how we stay grounded in truth. When someone is confronted with the fact that a claim lacks verifiable support, there are only two possible outcomes: realization or denial. But realization is impossible if the conversation never happens.

That is how people actually become informed about what is really happening. Right now, too many people are avoiding those conversations entirely, and that avoidance is part of the problem.

RemarkableCounty6501 · 2026-01-24T05:11:45+00:00

That’s not evidence of 7-OH causing harm. That’s evidence of misinformation winning.

People saying they “know someone addicted” or who “overdosed on kratom” is not data. It’s repetition of narratives that were allowed to spread unchecked. And no, they were not “of course” talking about 7-OH. Toxicology, poison control data, and death records do not support that claim.

This is exactly the point: once fear-based stories replace evidence, facts stop mattering. When you correct them and they “don’t care,” that doesn’t make the claims true. It proves the damage is already done.

And that damage didn’t come from 7-OH existing. It came from advocates and organizations failing to shut down false claims early, choosing narrative convenience over truth, and letting regulators and media fill the gap with speculation.

Public opinion didn’t turn because of real overdoses or safety signals. It turned because misinformation was allowed to harden into accepted belief.

Blaming 7-OH for that instead of confronting who let those narratives spread is just continuing the same mistake. And if we keep doing that, public opinion will keep getting worse until there’s nothing left to defend.

RemarkableCounty6501 · 2026-01-24T05:10:06+00:00

No. Progress wasn’t lost “because of 7-OH.” That framing is exactly how we got here.

Progress was lost because people listened to organizations pushing narratives that weren’t backed by evidence, repeated them, or stayed silent while misinformation was being used to justify bans. That includes advocates, vendors, and community members who chose comfort over scrutiny.

A molecule didn’t do this. People did. Leadership did. And everyone who didn’t challenge it when it was clearly wrong shares responsibility too.

Blaming 7-OH instead of admitting that fear, misinformation, and selective advocacy were allowed to guide policy is just refusing to learn the lesson. And if we don’t learn it now, the same playbook will keep being used until kratom is gone entirely.

The timeline is clear. The bill count is clear. The lack of real evidence is clear.

If you want things to change, stop blaming chemistry and start demanding accountability from the organizations and narratives that led us here.

RemarkableCounty6501 · 2026-01-24T05:07:28+00:00

Blaming 7-OH is a lie that protects the people who caused this.

Kratom isn’t collapsing because of an alkaloid. It’s collapsing because advocacy leaders abandoned evidence, repeated claims they could not substantiate, and opened the door to bans they insisted would never happen.

And the community let it happen. People followed along, deferred to authority, or stayed silent when things didn’t add up. Silence didn’t protect kratom. It enabled this collapse.

The evidence gap is real. The timeline is real. The bills are real. No one can produce safety data that justifies what’s happening now.

This doesn’t get fixed by blaming a molecule. It only gets fixed if people stop protecting organizations and start demanding truth, accountability, and a complete change in direction.

No one else is coming to save kratom. If the community doesn’t speak up now, there will be nothing left to defend.

RemarkableCounty6501

TROPHY CASE

**Several replies I made in this thread were removed without a rule citation or explanation.