The Kratom Lobby’s Hidden Hand

Christopher McCurdy, a University of Florida professor, has been found to have longstanding ties to the American Kratom Association (AKA), a lobbying group that advocates for kratom consumers. These connections are not disclosed in his conflict-of-interest statements or on the papers he publishes.

The fight to keep kratom legal is not just about its potential medicinal properties; it’s also about big money and special interests. The AKA has poured millions into lobbying efforts, including hiring scientists like McCurdy to make their case. This cozy relationship raises questions about research integrity and whether the public interest is being served.

McCurdy’s work on kratom’s therapeutic potential is impressive, but so too are his ties to the industry he’s researching. His trips to statehouses and Washington D.C., courtesy of the AKA, have been instrumental in convincing lawmakers that kratom is safe enough to remain widely available.

Other scientists who consult with and research for the AKA disclose their relationship. However, McCurdy has built a reputation as a neutral arbiter in the debate over kratom’s risks and benefits, despite his own published research finding kratom use can lead to severe withdrawal symptoms in newborns exposed in utero.

McCurdy’s efforts opposing the criminalization of kratom started as early as 2018, when he joined with other scientists to convince the DEA not to classify kratom as a Schedule I narcotic. This successful effort has raised questions about the undue influence of industry on policy decisions.

The issue is not just about kratom; it’s about the broader relationship between industry and science. When scientists fail to disclose their connections to lobbying groups, it erodes trust in research and undermines public health efforts. The consequences can be far-reaching, from regulatory decisions to funding for research projects.

McCurdy’s failure to disclose his connections has raised red flags about the role of industry in shaping policy decisions. Policymakers and regulators need to take a closer look at the lobbying efforts surrounding kratom regulation. They must also consider whether research funded by industries with vested interests is truly unbiased.

The lack of transparency in scientific research can lead to a system where industry influence supplants public interest. To prevent this, scientists must be free to pursue their research without undue influence, but they also have a responsibility to disclose conflicts of interest.