Ohio Senate General Government Committee hears proponent testimony for bill to regulate kratom sales

Supporters of Senate Bill 299 told the Senate General Government Committee that carefully framed regulation can protect consumers without cutting off adults who rely on natural kratom leaf for symptom relief.

Andrew Toups, a 52‑year‑old SSDI recipient who described a range of severe spinal and degenerative conditions, said he relied on natural kratom leaf to reduce pain and avoid high‑dose prescription opioids. “Don’t cut Ohioans off who have the kind of pain that I deal with,” Toups said, urging the committee to preserve legal access to natural kratom while targeting synthetic derivatives.

Manufacturing consultant Jessica Gerding urged a safety and standardization approach. She described using the new dietary ingredient (NDI) framework to verify identity, set contaminant limits, conduct toxicology studies and define intake parameters. Gerding said the goal should be “to encourage products that are defined, tested and transparent,” not to push consumers toward illicit markets.

Retailers and business operators also testified. Matthew Stewart, who has imported and retailed responsibly sourced kratom leaf for years, and Natalie DeVere, director of operations at Miracle Kratom, described commercial approaches that exclude enhanced extracts and concentrated synthetic alkaloids. DeVere said Ohio’s regulatory ambiguity — including an interpretation by the Ohio Department of Agriculture that discouraged labeling for human consumption — leaves retailers unable to provide clear safety information to adult consumers.

Experts representing advocacy and industry groups emphasized a legal distinction between natural kratom and engineered synthetic compounds, often discussed as “7‑OH” or variants. Sheldon Bradshaw, an FDA regulatory attorney representing Botanicals for Better Health and Wellness, said properly standardized extracts can improve consistency and reduce risk and noted FDA’s ongoing study of kratom. Bradshaw and other witnesses said kratom has a complex mix of more than 50 alkaloids and that isolating or chemically converting a single alkaloid produces a new chemical entity distinct from the botanical leaf.

Walker Gahlman of the Global Kratom Coalition urged numeric limits and testing thresholds to distinguish naturally occurring, trace post‑harvest degradants from chemically manipulated products. He cited a 400 parts‑per‑million (about 0.04%) baseline for naturally occurring 7‑OH on a dry‑weight basis and said the bill’s testing and labeling requirements would help consumers avoid adulterated products.

Committee members questioned witnesses about addictiveness, whether kratom functions as an opioid, and how much mitragynine converts to 7‑OH in the body. Witnesses described kratom as having a weak affinity for mu opioid receptors compared with classic opioids and said studies show post‑harvest and metabolic conversions occur at trace levels that are unlikely to produce opioid‑level respiratory depression. Witnesses emphasized that SB299 would require product testing and labeling to make such distinctions transparent for consumers.

The committee concluded the second hearing without taking formal action and noted a large volume of written testimony available to members. The record shows supporters urging regulation that would require age gating, testing, labeling and explicit bans on concentrated synthetic alkaloids while preserving access to natural kratom leaf for adults.