Thursday, October 6, 2016

Mitragyna speciosa: Miracle Herb or Killer Opiate?

The DEA has a long and questionable history in the ‘war on drugs’. Lately, it has come to the public’s attention that the infamous government agency plans on emergency scheduling two chemical compounds from the Kratom plant as Schedule 1 Substances- the most restricted categories of drug compounds. As you can imagine, this has faced considerable backlash from proponents of Kratom as well as those who see its potential in the field of medicine.

Kratom is almost as commonplace in Southeast Asia as a cup of coffee in the United States. Mitragyna Speciosa is literally in the coffee family and the DEA thinks it can outright destroy lives.

The Transnational Institute, a research and advocacy group, reported in 2011 that kratom "is chewed in teashops, at certain ceremonies (though this practice is fading), and other informal social events, as well as while engaging in manual labor and in the comfort of one’s own home. Eating kratom is a tradition that has been practiced for centuries in southern Thailand and up to 70 percent of the male population in some districts use kratom daily. Indeed, many people in southern Thailand consider chewing kratom similar to drinking coffee."[1]

Despite this, the DEA has taken precautionary measures in banning the substances that can be derived from Kratom because they believe that there isn’t enough research that supports its purported benefits. The agency has established a two-year probationary ban in order to establish the possible medicinal effects of this plant. I can empathize with their cautionary sentiments but their timing could not be any worse. Currently, there is an opioid painkiller and heroin epidemic in the United States and Kratom could be the key to harm reduction and potentially saving thousands of lives.

Kratom, according to a study done for the Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, can be a safer analog to opioids as it helps reduce pain with only minimal negative side effects.

The study found several positive effects (from most to least common): euphoria, relaxation, enhanced sociability, increased energy, pain relief, sensory enhancement, and warmth or tingling. It also found some negative effects (from most to least common): nausea and stomachaches, withdrawal (from addiction), chills and sweats, dizziness and unsteadiness, vomiting, hangovers, and itching. Reviewing other research, the study found no good evidence that kratom alone has caused deadly overdoses.

According to the study, the pain relief element has become particularly promising for pain patients who want to seek alternatives to highly addictive, potentially deadly opioid painkillers. The study also found that kratom may aid with easing withdrawal from opioid addiction.(1)

The study is bolstered with evidence from the transnational institute, which reports that Kratom use in Thailand within the past few decades has been tied to reduction of pain from withdrawal symptoms. It was even widely used to wean off of alcohol and nicotine dependence and was not exclusively effective for opiate withdrawals.

However, this evidence is not up to par with the Government’s expectations for ‘medicinal value’. Large Scale clinical trials like the ones the FDA conducts are needed to prove that Kratom is more than just another illicit and highly addictive substance. This process of testing and research could take a lot more than two years, as we have seen with Medical Marijuana legalization on the federal level. That is a scary prospect for people who desperately need to wean off opiates or risk dying from withdrawal from the likes of heroin and fentanyl (another opiate).

Meanwhile, thousands of Americans are dying because of opiate addiction and dependence on heroin, a drug that is arguably much more harmful than Kratom. The idea of Kratom being banned terrifies me because we as a society could lose out on a potentially wonderful alternative to opioid painkiller addiction. I can see why the DEA wants to put a short term ban on it- they want to be absolutely positive that the plant does have some medicinal value, but I am incredibly fearful of Kratom becoming mired in the bureaucratic bog of drug legalization. It’s terrifying to think about all those opiate-addicted victims that are going to suffer in the short term while waiting for what seems to be a decent alternative to withdrawal and a valuable tool to wean off truly harmful ‘hard’ drugs.





[1] http://www.vox.com/2016/9/19/12941112/kratom-dea-ban

Friday, September 30, 2016

The Potential Dangers of Open-Carry Gun Laws

Open-Carry Gun laws are making situations more complicated than they have to be. In the past year alone, The United States has had two mass shootings in which citizens who openly carried their firearms have managed to confuse the police force and first responders. In a dangerous scenario where there are masses of people, those who openly-carry their firearms add to the confusion and may even escalate the situation. Those who openly-carry can not only cause confusion but prevent police officers from doing their job safely and correctly. Open-Carry gun laws endanger those that actively put them into practice as well as the people around them and in my opinion, are worth reconsidering.

Mark Follman, a writer for MotherJones, describes how this process takes place and provides transparent examples of this happening within the past few years. One example in particular that Follman points out is a group of open-carriers at a Black Lives Matter protest in New York.

upwards of 20 to 30 people were open carrying AR-15s and other types of military-style semi-automatic rifles at the Black Lives Matters protest last Thursday, which "created confusion for the police as the attack unfolded, and in its immediate aftermath made it more difficult for officers to distinguish between suspects and marchers."[1]

Follman goes onto describe what these people were wearing at the protest, explaining how they donned bullet-proof vests, gas masks, in addition to the assault rifles they had strapped to their backs. I personally do not understand why a protester would need special forces-level combat gear for a supposed peaceful protest. I understand they are invoking their rights but surely the phrase ‘There’s a time and place for everything’ comes to mind.

In addition, I agree with Follman on the basis that open-carry gun laws can complicate situations for police officers. They cannot only make situations worse by confusing police officers responding to a threat, but can also divert police officers from the person they should truly be pursuing. An example of this is Mark Hughes, a man who was involved in a peaceful protest the day the Dallas attack took place. Hughes was listed as a suspect on the Police department’s twitter and was subsequently detained (after he turned himself in) and interrogated. Situations like this help to exemplify how citizens who openly carry their firearms compound the danger that already exists in these scenarios and for a lack of a better term, waste valuable time the police could be using to stop actual suspects.

President Obama even said the following:

Imagine if you're a police officer and you're trying to sort out who is shooting at you," he said, "and there are a bunch of people who have got guns on them."(1)

The United States’ priority should be the public at large and demonstrations that emphasize people ‘exercising their right’ should be put into context. Citizens who want to open carry their firearms should think about where they are going before they bring their guns around. There’s a time and place for everything and people should undoubtedly reconsider bringing their guns to high risk events, for the safety of themselves and others. Open carry gun laws endanger those who practice them and the public in high risk situations. Gun laws should definitely be restructured in my opinion, to better account for public safety while still giving gun-owners their amendment-given right. It’s all about context, time, and place.

Thursday, September 22, 2016

Gun laws, Police Re-training, or Both?

Can you guess what happened to a 13-year-old African-American boy last week? That’s right, he was shot and killed by one of the men in blue. Yes, again. However, this particular case is not so easy to take sides on. The victim, an eighth grader named Tyre King, was shot during a chase down an alley because he pulled out what looked to be a firearm out of his waistband, which was later found to be a BB Gun. Though he was only a young teenager, I can understand why a police officer would feel the need to defend himself through force because he might have thought his life was in his danger. Situations like this one are a reflection of our Country’s need to restructure laws regarding replica/actual firearms as well as a wake-up call to reconsider traditional police training and tactics.

Investigators on the scene first believed King’s weapon was a handgun, but “upon further inspection, was later determined to be a BB gun with an attached laser sight.”[1]

That’s not all to the story though. The police officer involved in the shooting has a past. Specifically, Officer Bryan Mason was involved in another shooting in 2012.

In 2012, Mason shot and killed a 51-year-old man who was reportedly aiming a gun at another man in his home, and refused to drop the weapon when officers arrived. Mason was cleared of any wrongdoing in that case.(1)

It’s clear that this case is problematic for a number of reasons. Kids that are in their early teens should not be getting shot and killed. But on the other hand, kids in their early teens shouldn’t try to rob other people of their money or walk around neighborhoods with realistic BB Guns tucked into their waistband. Simultaneously, police officers shouldn’t be so quick to pull out their guns on young teenagers that robbed a mere $10 from their victim. Indisputably, America needs to rethink its laws regarding replica firearms and firearms in general but simultaneously also needs to address the police brutality situation.

While it is the police force’s job to protect and serve the citizens of the United States, recently their reputation has been tainted by the seemingly purposeful shootings of African Americans. This is something they cannot ignore. To gain the respect of the public, I think the police have to reconsider how they train their officers. That goes hand in hand with stricter laws regarding firearms/replicas.

I almost sympathize with officer Mason. But, his actions and the way this situation unfolded tells us something. Police in this country need to be better trained on how to de-escalate situations without the immediate use of firearms. In addition, I think more laws should be implemented to prevent minors from acquiring replica firearms, for their own safety and protection. These tragedies have to stop, but it’s a complicated issue that has to be tackled at several different angles all at once.