Yeah, if God didn't want us drinking Kratom and poppy pod tea and the like, he wouldn't have made them would he?
mmm...that would imply the same for dinoflagellates containing saxitoxin, caster beans containing ricin, oleander containing corrigen etc....
OK, I've taken Mr Blonde's statement out of context here - sorry, I just couldn't resist
However, some plants and naturally occurring organisms are definitely to be avoided because of toxicity, and in a sense are rightly scheduled. Just because something is natural it doesn't mean it's safe. Saxitoxin (TZ) is listed in schedule one of the Chemical Weapons Convention and has an LD50 in mice of ~3-10ug/Kg.
So, are Kratom and some other banned plants in this league? Of course not, although some plants such as Datura were banned both for their toxicity (datura contains atropine and scopolamine) and because more people were eating it - and often ending up in hospital.
Still, the banning of ephedra was definitely concerned mostly with stopping another source of the meth precursor; salvia because of a 'perceived' popularity and the fact it contained an unscheduled and powerful class of drug - from which many analogues can and will be made; cactii simply because of increased popularity etc...
So what's next? What if someone comes up with a super potent strain of passion fruit vine, or if people turn to the more dangerous and widely distributed plants that are currently allowed? Perhaps they'll all be banned eventually.
Somehow though, I just can't see many Drug Squad officers becoming botanists. Perhaps there's a few closet gardeners amongst them, but I've heard of several cases where banned psychoactive plants have been overlooked during a raid.
i cant get over the potential it had to help hardcore opiate users kick the habbit. surely that alone would warrant some research into it?
oh yeah, its not patentable.
It certainly does warrent some research being done, and it's very likely some Australian University would be willing to facilitate such a study, particularly if inconclusive evidence on its efficacy already exists. But as to whether it would have it's legal status changed is another thing. Of course, it's more likely if outcomes showed mitragynine or one of it's analogues is indicated to be a safe and effective treatment. As we know, drugs seem to be able to be multi- classifiable in this country e.g. amphetamine is a class 1, illicit drug in Qld, yet it is also a schedule 8 pharmaceutical. However, on the other hand, from what from Wikipedia states even meth has some accepted medical value.
Strictly speaking, as a Schedule 8 drug, the medical use of methamphetamine is recognized in Australia, however in practice this is not the case.
Wiki - methamphetamine
So while research may be possible, and the outcomes could prove favourable for further trials etc, if there was a danger of abuse, or health concerns from use, then it might very well end up shelved like so many useful products.
Last thing we want is it taken away again![:\](https://bluelight.org/xf/BL_Images/Orig_Emoji/wrygrin.gif "wry grin :\")
