Last year an article was published on Forbes.com titled "Is Kratom the New "Bath Salts" or Just an Organic Pain Reliever with Euphoric Effects?".
The article was written by contributing author David DiSalvo, who
generally writes articles on science, technology and culture. The
article was written after the long Bath Salts controversy, which we may
all remember. His article did a good job at describing Kratom but the
article had numerous factual errors such as the tried and true media
myth that Kratom causes hallucinations and delusions. As we all know,
this is totally false, but it has been reported in the media constantly
and still is today. The article had numerous other factual errors, which
is not surprising considering Mr. DiSalvo was not familiar with kratom
when he wrote this articleand he seemed to have done little research
into the true effects.
The article was good id that it mentioned the Kratom Association and
actually mentioned the fight to protect Kratom as well. This is unique
because most news articles only quote the D.E.A. or addiction
specialists who want to make everyone believe that Kratom is addictive
just so they can get new patients.
Earlier this year Mr. DiSalvo wrote a follow up article titled "The Kratom Experiment"
where he recgonized the massive amount of reponses that he received in
the aftermath of his initial article and, like a good reporter, actually
decided to find out what Kratom is truly about and how Kratom truly
works. His initial article received nearly 50,000 views and over 80
comments and, in response to this outpouring of response, he wanted to
nget to the bottom Kratom. Initially, Mr. DiSalvo purchached a bottle
of "Lucky Kratom" brand kratom capsules which, to say the least, got a
huge amount of opposition due to Lucky Kratom's reputation among Kratom
fans. Lucky Kratom is, in fact, blacklisted by the Kratom Association
and numerous kratom supporters voiced their opposition to DiSalvo's use
of this brand.
In the beginning of April, DiSalvo wrote a 3rd and follow up article
which detailed his experience with Kratom. He decided to use Kratom and
the article written described his experience with using Kratom and the
effects he experienced. He published the article on his own perosnal
website because he was approached by three different Kratom companies
(Mayan Kratom, Nutmeg Kratom and Online Kratom) who all offered him free
samples for his experiement. He felt that his accepting of these
samples may have been a conflict of interest because Forbes pays him for
articles. In any case, he used these samples and described his
experience. He choose to drink the Kratom powder with orange juice in
the morning and stuck to Bali, Maeng Da and Green Thai.
DiSalvo described his effects as overall positive, similar to coffee
but without the jitters or the crash. He also described a mild calming
effect that he experienced from Kratom and he experienced that the
effects of Kratom where much more level and longer-lasting than coffee.
Now, for the side effects? Considering that, as the media wants us to
believe; Kratom is more addictive than Heroin, causes hallucinations
like L.S.D., works just like Cocaine and has more side effects than all
of them combined...What side effects did Mr. DiSalvo experience?
Essentially none! (He did note that he had red eyes
after using a specific extract fusion but in general he noted that there
were no effects worth nothing.) Really? No side effects worth nothing? How could this be? How is this possible? Hmmm. Maybe the news media are not being as honest as they claim to be.
In any case, DiSalvo noted that Kratom is a lot like good coffee, but
with a longer lasting and even effect with a pleasent finish opposed to
the crash one would get from coffee. He also noted that, after stopping
kratom, the withdrawl was actually less severe than his withdrawl
experiences from Coffee. The effects of stopping kratom were mild
sluggishness which wore off in a day, opposed to stopping Kratom where
he experienced "excruciating headaches" for days. Kratom "withdrawl", he
says, is essentially non existant.
In conclusion, DiSalvo's article is a breath of fresh air amid the
pure propaganda that we see on a weekly basis which bashes Kratom and
lies about Kratom non-stop. DiSalvo concluded that he saw no reason why
Kratom should be banned and also noted that if large amounts of coffee
are legal to buy, which is stronger in effects than any Kratom, then why
should Kratom be banned?
Indeed Mr. DiSalvo...Indeed!
No comments:
Post a Comment