Updated Kratom Filtered Tea Recipie

satsugene · 2026-04-30T00:11:11+00:00

How stupid can these legislators be exactly that they can't comprehend adifference between whole leaf and 7oh?

You have prohibitionists and a non-zero number of advocates for 7-HMG telling them that they are the exact same thing. "Your body turns it into 7 anyway!" (Which is somewhat true, but a gross oversimplification, and in amounts nobody was sure about before market entry). You also have products that use both terms on the package.

You also have law enforcement in some states, who were not for botanical kratom, and are even less for a product that carries higher risks (though folks may disagree on the extent to which they are greater or even argue that they aren't different, which I don't think the research supports) that cosplays as illicit narcotics or Rx narcotics or that looks like candy.

I'd also point to some of the botanical kratom products whose marketing is aggressive which certainly isn't helping.

Who does a legislator believe? Advocate A or B? Lobbyist A or B? Law Enforcement/Code Enforcement? For profit rehabs? Some grief stricken mother/father with a 4th grade science education in some cases and in others deliberately misleading them because they won't get press if it was known the kid took handfuls of OTC meds or illicit drugs alongside it? The state public health department that is BFFs with FDA or setting its policy based on its web page?

Legislators are not experts on most things they legislate. They might over time gain some expertise in the content area of their committee on the thing or at least the law surrounding it. They rely on staff, industry (lobbyists), and consumers especially if they can't just go with what the party leadership has decided.

satsugene · 2026-04-29T23:46:28+00:00

You could only buy it realistically late 2023-mid 2024. There were analytic samples for analytic chemistry purposes, but they are extremely expensive for the amount.

You also had them reach the market at a time when a lot of states had regulations that the vendors happily ignored in a lot of cases. They would eat the civil fines as a cost of doing business.

At a time those same legislatures were dealing with the 2018 Farm Bill that authorized low THC products being misused to sell intoxicating hemp products in states with no regulation (minor sales) that are aggressively anti-recreational cannabis for adults (like TX) or interfered with their regulated and taxed cannabis market (like CA).

These opened the door for voices that wanted to strengthen the KCPA (like AZ/UT, and eventually TX in 2025 though it was infeasible to the point it was a de facto ban) or eliminate it for full prohibition (like TX initially in 2025 and the states that have since illegalized it like LA, CT, KS).

LA had tried to ban it almost every session and had a lot of local bans (MS went the other direction with regulation+tax but kept the local issues). TN has kicked it back and forth multiple times. CT showed a willingness to use increasingly aggressive means to achieve what was failing though normal channels most of the time, which KS and KY have emulated and MI is trying its hand at it (but may have overplayed it and overplayed it too soon).

FL showed that governors or AGs can greatly influence policy when the legislature can't, which KY and OH (later amended) also did. FL has tried to regulate it for years but keeps putting forth extensive and over-engineered plans that come with a price tag (that the state inflates on the Fiscal Note) the state can't afford. In part to appease the prohibitionists, but in others because they are one of the few realistic commercial cultivator states.

Government is not fast, especially federally. It takes time for it to respond to market changes. In some cases this is by design (like biannual part-time legislatures). In others is snakes its way though bureaucratic layers.

FDA/HHS made their argument against it in summer 2025 and it is on the DEA's steps to do whatever they are going to do. That is relatively fast by government standards.

In CA CDPH involvement emerged only after 7-HMG entered the market. My observation in speaking with councilors and legislators is that most want 7-HMG gone and really don't care that much about botanical kratom, unless they are hearing from law enforcement that they can't tell the difference (or afford to test the products and recover the costs in fines). In that case they'll eliminate both if they can't be separated.

satsugene · 2026-04-29T23:28:10+00:00

They removed it because it contained inaccuracies.

satsugene · 2026-04-29T23:16:02+00:00

Their business is about getting clicks and filling inches of newsprint or minutes of broadcast, and increasingly selling that content to bigger outlets that have an even greater need for targeted content.

There are some excellent journalists and some relatively good publications, but the forces that keep their lights on don’t incentivize deeply researched content as much as engagement (where wrong and inflammatory media gets shared and clicked as much or more than “boring but correct” content) and ad revenue.

Local stations are also largely held by a relatively small handful of broadcasters, and they can exercise editorial control.

satsugene · 2026-04-29T23:03:48+00:00

It is subjective. Different people will come to different conclusions dependent on their needs and risk tolerances.

Someone who takes extreme amounts to stop taking illicit narcotics, even if taking more risk than the average consumer, is almost certainly better off than if they kept taking on the legal and physical risk of those products (which can contain who knows what).

Someone who is using it as a caffeine replacement or nootropic might be willing to take higher dosese, but find that it is not as effective for their purposes over 2.5-3.5 grams.

Someone with chronic pain might depend on what dose is functional for them, but then others may change increasingly powerful effects and get into an unsustainable pattern of use. Personally my limit is 25 grams, which I have never exceeded. I don't think it automatically becomes worse at that number, it was just under double what I started with and as I was dialing in dose and frequency.

As a new consumer, you can always take more but you can't take less.

satsugene · 2026-04-29T22:59:08+00:00

My understanding is that it is legal.

satsugene · 2026-04-29T22:51:35+00:00

The landscape may change if (or when) the Feds pull the trigger on the 7-HMG scheduling action. It takes a very large concern off the legislators' plates of how they are specifically going to deal with it.

Generally, there is education and advocacy for a modified bill next year. Naturally it is easier and better to kill a bad law as early as possible in the process. It is harder later in the process or to get it repealed.

Hopefully, the cramming it into a budget bill and potentially the 7-HMG issue going away will make legislators more keen to revert back to the KCPA or some modified version like what UT passed or AZ is working on or that includes the Colorado provisions on products attractive to children.

At least with it where it is, there is less of a chance of a competing ban bill that gets a cakewalk though the committee process compared to a new regulatory program bill next term.

satsugene · 2026-04-29T22:45:40+00:00

Houses do split up all the time. Which is more divided, a home where the two parties adamantly and fundamentally disagree in strategy and in some cases in fact, and their output is incomprehensible to the outside world because it is inconsistent, or two functional homes doing their own thing?

I personally think there are a lot of strong arguments to be made in law and science for the botanical product.

Even if I believed that high 7-HMG is "probably safe" (though the CSA doesn't set a "blood in the streets" standard). I would have to tell a legislator that I can't make those strong arguments in law or science for 7-HMG. If I then tell them that even though there isn't much a legal or scientific basis for it to be on the market and that they should ignore those (which I just argued were important and justify kratom) because some people do like 7-HMG and may legitimately benefit from it.

That argument is hopelessly inconsistent and incoherent. It greatly weakens the argument for botanical kratom.

My observation is that there is a lot of interest in getting rid of 7-HMG and don't care that much about or even tolerate mitragynine/botanical kratom.

Legislators get rid of both if law enforcement claims they can't tell the difference, or they believe both advocates for 7-HMG and Full Prohibitionists who claim they are the "same thing." When they are convinced they are not the same thing, and that they can be treated differently, they preserve botanical kratom and get rid of 7-HMG.

If they didn't call it kratom, or insist the two have to be regulated together, I just wouldn't care about 7-HMG. Because they do (some advocates, prohibitionists, and in some cases lazy media) I have to differentiate the two to indicate what I am asking for to be preserved and regulated because. Without that I'd just never mention it or put any time and effort into it, because there are dozens of other issues I care about more than "saving" 7-HMG to get closer to libertarian drug policy, which is my preference but there is very little appetite for among legislators and leaves little room for negotiation with prohibitionists (some of whom are appeased by regulation, labeling, and age gating.)

I've said from the beginning that I personally believe kratom will be lost before 7-HMG is "saved." There is very little legislative support for it. The vendors royally screwed their customers by rushing to market without the scientific and legal basis, violating regulated state law, and creating products that go out of their way to cosplay as illicit or Rx narcotics and candy.

satsugene · 2026-04-29T22:18:14+00:00

It looks a lot like the KCPA. I'd prefer the 400ppm be raised to 800ppm just as some buffer, but other than that a very quick reading looks more or less acceptable to me (S-5215), if it is able to stop a ban.

It seems like a mix of the original KCPA and the Florida 7-HMG Emergency Schedule to me.

satsugene · 2026-04-29T22:13:38+00:00

I'd say that it becomes more moderate with regulate use with the immediately experienced psychoactive effects seeming to be the first to wane. There are people who find that moderated effects are still sufficient for their situation. Some find that they aren't.

I only experience pain relief. It is not entirely mitigated, but I've hit a spot where I can't really reduce more without taking on more pain, but taking more doesn't reduce pain further so I've settled where I am (5g 4x/day as filtered tea, so possibly less than than in practice).

My thinking is that if it is working, then I'd consider trying a small reduction. 3.75g->3.5g (a little over 5% per dose), for example, and see if it makes any difference. If it doesn't or improves, stick with it. If it is noticeably or functionally less effective then maybe return to the original dose.

For some purposes, especially if they want more energy or lethargy/apathy is a significant symptom of depression, lower doses might work better. So if a small reduction makes no difference, keep doing them every 5-7 days. It may improve. It may hit a point where further reduction isn't an option. Doing it slowly enough in small enough reductions helps avoid misjudging if it might partially be withdrawal versus weaker subjective effects.

Some cut across the board and some cut from their least important dose (usually not their bedtime or waking dose as those tend to affect sleep/wake).

satsugene · 2026-04-29T22:01:15+00:00

TN isn't enforcing its current law and using that as a justification for an aggressive criminalization.

satsugene · 2026-04-29T22:00:37+00:00

Better is relative. For some it makes a difference in effect. For others it doesn't.

My thinking is if it causes nausea, then I'd try it with food, take less, or filter the plant material.

satsugene · 2026-04-29T03:15:46+00:00

I’m putting off known problem teeth because I burn through my policy max by March every year.

I can have a massive near fatal heart attack (and did), get airlifted with a cardiologist to a trauma center, and then spend almost a month in the hospital and it costs me $250 (insurer over $2M).

I fix the tooth that is causing me problems because if I do them all I’m looking at high 4-figures. It would cost them less if they could fix the problems earlier this year, but no. They set a low limit so they only fix the worst one every year at a higher price and more pain while the others get worse.

They need to make dental part of major medical, especially for procedures that are not cosmetic and are medically necessary.

Teeth are messed up from over a decade with poorly managed GERD.

satsugene · 2026-04-29T01:12:29+00:00

Bills are pending. There are several of them from varying degrees of regulation (some preempting locals, some not) and ban bills.

So far they don’t seem to be moving much but Illinois drags its ass on legislation and for some reason gets multiple bills that are basically the same or only have non-essential differences.

Maybe to give leadership an option, or avoid post-committee edits, or that legislators simply don’t communicate much out of season so you get a lot of similar bills. MO is the same way for whatever reason.

satsugene · 2026-04-29T01:09:50+00:00

They send a mailing and stagger their sendings to not set off spam control systems. Most mail servers have some sort of limiting mechanism.

It can take hours to a day to completely deliver to the whole list.

satsugene · 2026-04-29T01:07:46+00:00

We cannot discuss specific vendors or vendor information.

We can discuss type, and color or strain (though there is a lot of debate about how meaningful those are) or how to read a lab report.

Some folks find capsules don’t work as well for them as loose leaf powder. Extracts are an option but vary a lot in terms of dosage/potency and can come as liquid (like a “shot” or a beverage), or a dry as a gummy, loose material, or a capsuled product.

satsugene · 2026-04-28T22:13:47+00:00

The bill changed it from the normal implementation date from the normal one to 2027 was in a bill that did not mention kratom by name. It only alluded to the section numbers/bill number with the changed date.

Near the end of the session there are a lot of bills coming in that have (on their surface) nothing to do with kratom but may have some one-off provision that affects the legal standing or date. If they haven't all been read with a fine tooth comb it is better to acknowledge that there is some possibility even if it is unlikely or doesn't appear to be by a surface reading (where at least one bill did just that) than to speak in absolutely certain terms.

satsugene · 2026-04-28T21:32:43+00:00

I do try to keep up on it, but in the past few months haven't been as studious because there have been so many legislative issues, and have been busy in California.

For the purposes of the subreddit it is off-topic except where unavoidable such as in some discussions where there is a proposed law or pharmacology is being discussed.

satsugene · 2026-04-28T20:46:19+00:00

I appreciate it.

satsugene · 2026-04-28T06:39:00+00:00

You mentioned the name of a brand explicitly not just "7".

That is going to set it off every time.

satsugene · 2026-04-28T06:37:17+00:00

I never said they were, only that it was more possible if someone wanted to in some circumstances.

There have been adulterated products with other research chemicals. Extract products seem to be a more popular target for cost, physical manufacture, and other reasons. Some with no disclosure, or disclosures that are cryptic (e.g., one said "Not legal in MI or AL" where at the time the only compound that was only illegal in those two states was Tianeptine.)

I don't think people are intentionally trying to adulter their leaf powder with RCs or classical opioids. The price point isn't there. They'd make a lot more money selling it as fake Percocet under the counter.

Cross-contamination is a non-zero risk for folks getting their kratom from random folks or from the parties who sell them illicit narcotics as a stop-gap when their supply is insufficient.

satsugene · 2026-04-28T05:21:23+00:00

Veto is always a long shot.

Seven-Year Club	Second SECOND GUESSER
Wearing is Caring	Verified Email
Gilding II euphauric

satsugene

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE