Emergency Rescheduling Timeline?

[acct55]

I'm not sure how many of you attended the AKA's Zoom call last week previewing their presentation for the WHO, but basically they outlined 3 possible outcomes from the WHO meeting:

1) Emergency rescheduling
2) Not sufficient evidence to proceed and will continue surveillance
3) Sufficient evidence to proceed with critical review with skepticism

My question is what would emergency rescheduling (outcome #1) look like? How long would that take?

What exactly would that mean and how long would it take to go into effect?

[BallzDeep9]

How long would that take?

ON another thread, I posted a LINK to the Transcript of that AKA video / posted on Reddit r/kratom - As I said on the other thread there are MANY interesting questions & points and topics on that AKA video..... We don't seem to have enough ppl interested in participating here to discuss. Days go by, threads go by, oh well.

As I recall, What I said on that thread was the AKA will "maybe" know in December which direction the WHO / ECDD is going with their decision... But IIRC Mac wasn't sure if AKA would even know that, this Year - pretty sure the entire process will take One Year to play out...

FOR SURE the original "Fear Mongering" from AKA about a "Worldwide Ban" and impending DOOM -- has been proven completely FALSE. There is NO impending "Ban" happening, and ANY decision from WHO, even a negative, (which appears unlikely), would take about One Year to implement...

[acct55]

How long would that take?

ON another thread, I posted a LINK to the Transcript of that AKA video / posted on Reddit r/kratom - As I said on the other thread there are MANY interesting questions & points and topics on that AKA video..... We don't seem to have enough ppl interested in participating here to discuss. Days go by, threads go by, oh well.

As I recall, What I said on that thread was the AKA will "maybe" know in December which direction the WHO / ECDD is going with their decision... But IIRC Mac wasn't sure if AKA would even know that, this Year - pretty sure the entire process will take One Year to play out...

FOR SURE the original "Fear Mongering" from AKA about a "Worldwide Ban" and impending DOOM -- has been proven completely FALSE. There is NO impending "Ban" happening, and ANY decision from WHO, even a negative, (which appears unlikely), would take about One Year to implement...

Hey, so in the other thread you said " This Week! within 3 days we'll know about the W.H.O. meeting & their Preliminary Review of kratom... the AKA is doing their presentation either tomorrow or Tuesday I believe. By the end of the week, watch for latest news!!"

So what news are we expecting this week and what news will we have to wait until December or later for?

Thanks for the replies btw

[BallzDeep9]

Here's the post from AKA's Facebook Page... for those here who don't do Facebook:

“All public presentations on kratom were clearly opposed to the international scheduling of kratom. In fact, only one of the speakers addressed an issue other than kratom, demonstrating both how united the scientific community studying kratom is against a ban, and how unnecessary it was to include kratom in the WHO ECDD’s prereview process,” said Mac Haddow, Senior Fellow on Public Policy at the AKA.

Haddow continued, “Clearly the anti-kratom sentiment is coming from one source: the FDA. Although we didn’t hear the anti-kratom speakers today, the FDA will have the ability to make their views on kratom known as a part of the member-state submissions. However, based on the strong presentations made on the science of kratom during the presentations this morning, I believe we have established the position that the FDA is unfairly biased against kratom.”

The ECDD will remain in non-public discussions over the next four days, and then the review of member state submissions between now and early December. Their announcement of any decisions related to will be made public at that time.

[PistolsAtDawn]

Here's the post from AKA's Facebook Page... for those here who don't do Facebook:

“All public presentations on kratom were clearly opposed to the international scheduling of kratom. In fact, only one of the speakers addressed an issue other than kratom, demonstrating both how united the scientific community studying kratom is against a ban, and how unnecessary it was to include kratom in the WHO ECDD’s prereview process,” said Mac Haddow, Senior Fellow on Public Policy at the AKA.

Haddow continued, “Clearly the anti-kratom sentiment is coming from one source: the FDA. Although we didn’t hear the anti-kratom speakers today, the FDA will have the ability to make their views on kratom known as a part of the member-state submissions. However, based on the strong presentations made on the science of kratom during the presentations this morning, I believe we have established the position that the FDA is unfairly biased against kratom.”

The ECDD will remain in non-public discussions over the next four days, and then the review of member state submissions between now and early December. Their announcement of any decisions related to will be made public at that time.

Yeah, I don't do facebook, so I appreciate it. I dumped my account in 2011, I think. It's only gotten worse since then.

This is good news. If the FDA can't provide sound, scientific reasons to treat kratom as a dangerous drug, then hopefully the WHO will see they're trying to do the DEA's dirty work and do nothing at all.

[onespeedstop]

I just can't imagine kratom is a 'priority' in the U.S. Does someone in the current admin have a vendetta about it or something ? It's not like people are dying in the streets from kratom since the last time they looked at it and shrugged.

[PistolsAtDawn]

I just can't imagine kratom is a 'priority' in the U.S. Does someone in the current admin have a vendetta about it or something ? It's not like people are dying in the streets from kratom since the last time they looked at it and shrugged.

It's taken a hundred years to get marijuana policy to even move in the other direction at the state level, and it's still not any different at the Federal level. It may not be enforced in states that have enacted legislation, but that's just policy, not law.

[onespeedstop]

I just can't imagine kratom is a 'priority' in the U.S. Does someone in the current admin have a vendetta about it or something ? It's not like people are dying in the streets from kratom since the last time they looked at it and shrugged.

It's taken a hundred years to get marijuana policy to even move in the other direction at the state level, and it's still not any different at the Federal level. It may not be enforced in states that have enacted legislation, but that's just policy, not law.

Well, that's from "illegal" to not illegal. Kratom is nothing so far, no one really knows or cares, and it's safest that way. *shrug*

[KCobbBMore]

I just can't imagine kratom is a 'priority' in the U.S. Does someone in the current admin have a vendetta about it or something ? It's not like people are dying in the streets from kratom since the last time they looked at it and shrugged.

It's taken a hundred years to get marijuana policy to even move in the other direction at the state level, and it's still not any different at the Federal level. It may not be enforced in states that have enacted legislation, but that's just policy, not law.

Well, that's from "illegal" to not illegal. Kratom is nothing so far, no one really knows or cares, and it's safest that way. *shrug*

I agree with "Kratom is nothing so far, no one really knows or cares, and its safest that way". I am very comfortable with the current state of things (aside from States where it is illegal).

I've never heard anyone I know that is employed by FDA, DEA, any Agency, or Elected Official mention Kratom. I think it is towards the bottom of most agendas (if it all). Right now, with this Pandemic, it is likely extremely unimportant.

The whole "Act TODAY, or lose Kratom FOREVER!" campaign was effective in getting people riled up, but it turned me off.

[salpine29]

Yes, it's absurd that out of all of the problems occurring right now, why would kratom being a priority? What's really obvious, to me at least, is that if pharma is behind something, it will get pushed to the top of someone's list that can try to do anything about it. It's gross, but this is the way of the US gov and its agencies who are ruled by lobbyist money.

[acct55]

Precisely. I think people are being a little too calm about this, though I'm not encouraging panic in any way.

It's just that the DEA and FDA have been targeting kratom for a while now.

When they fail to do so via one way, they just start working on another. They're not going to stop. Isn't that obvious?

And since there is clearly a revolving door between pharma companies and the FDA, even if we get some kratom-friendly people in the FDA (currently none/not many) their times will be up eventually and their replacements are likely to have ties to the pharma companies or at least plans to work in that industry after their appointment is up.

[Fhietra899]

1) Emergency rescheduling
2) Not sufficient evidence to proceed and will continue surveillance
3) Sufficient evidence to proceed with critical review with skepticism

I didnt sure about "not sufficient evidence and critical review"... I think the pre review is fine, many positif things in the pre review, its will be weird if WHO doesnt read their Own pre-Review...
If i use my logics, its will be fine if i read that pre review, and jf there's will a weird news that says kratom will be in dangerous position i think we should distrust that news....