K@ at BKH

[Bula Kava House]

I appreciate certain members' concerns about this. Serving the tea is a 60 day trial to see how the atmosphere of the kava bar is affected. If it negatively affects the vibe, or if I think K@ is being inappropriately associated with kava in any way we will no longer serve it. This includes if we begin to sell too much of it. We're a kava bar, and will always be a kava bar.

Our sign that a member took a photo of advertising our K@ was placed so our daily customers, many of whom take K@ as well as kava, would know we have it. The sign will be taken down this week. After that, it will be something offered to people that know we have it, and will not be placed on the menu or officially advertised.

I had to think long and hard before deciding to give K@ a try. I don't expect everyone to agree with my decision but I will tell you the factors that swayed me:
-In normal doses K@ is only mildly addictive. Think like caffeine. We are serving it as a brewed tea. One serving has about the same amount of extracted active compounds as ingesting one gram of K@ powder. Anyone who has taken K@ knows how mild one gram is. Much milder than one shell of the kava we serve. We don't allow people to have more than two serving per visit.

-K@ is a close relative of coffee, which also affects opioid receptors. It has been used medicinally and socially for a very long time. When not being abused, it is mild and safe. People use it for energy, to lift mood, and to treat pain. Side effects are minimal. At the end of the day, K@ is another psychoactive plant that because of the abuse by a small minority has gotten a bad name in certain circles. Modern society continually tells us that certain plants with positive properties shouldn't be used. Whether it's cannabis, kava, or K@. There is almost always a puritanical and/or financial reason for these stigmas and prohibitions. That's not something I support.

-We're a very established kava bar. Most kava bars that serve K@ sell at least 60% K@. They opened with the intent to serve large amount of K@. If they didn't they would have gone out of business. We spent nearly six years building a kava community. Without the online store propping up the bar we would have failed. About two years ago we started selling enough kava in the bar to consider ourselves successful. Becoming an establishment that is anything but a kava bar won't happen because we have too many kava lovers in every day, and I simply won't let it happen. We will never be dependent on K@ to support our business.

We have some general guidelines with the serving of K@ as well:
-We don't serve K@ to newcomers. We are a kava bar and if we know a customer is new to kava and our establishment, they drink kava.

-People should know that it's habit forming if abused. If someone asks about it, that's part of the spiel.

-Customers are also informed that K@ is a traditional medicine, not a recreational product. People should use it when they need it, not as a go to beverage for a good time. Kava is better for that.

-We make the differences between kava and K@ clear to customers. They should not be associated with each other, any more than our smoothies are associated with kava.

-We don't serve customers more than two servings per visit.

-K@ is never mixed with kava. It is only served as a stand-alone hot tea.

-We don't put it on the menu. If someone comes in and we think it would be useful for them, we will inform them that we have it. For example, a regular customer comes in and says they hurt their back working out. In this case K@ would likely help more than kava and we will let them know we have it. The temporary sign was placed mainly to let our regular customers who know what K@ is know that we now have it.

I really do understand the concerns. I've had, and to a degree still do have the same concerns. I am incredibly sensitive to the culture of kava and will not do anything to jeopardize that. I started this because we have a quite a few customers that already take K@, and because I think it will help people. I hope that everyone can at least hesitantly hold the negative judgement for now. Most of you know me pretty well through this forum, and know how much I respect kava, and how important the health of the kava industry is to me.

Without context of how K@ works in my particular establishment, a judgement is uninformed. For a little perspective, we haven't sold more than six servings of K@ in one days since we started offering it. We sell an average of about 200 shells of kava every day.

I appreciate your understanding and input. I am happy to discuss this with members. Our K@ service is a fluid situation that is influenced by the feelings of customers and employees, and the effect it has on my bar. I've been very busy lately with some great kava projects so haven't been as active here. If you don't get a response to a question or concern here, feel free to send an email to [email protected].

 

[The Kap'n]

-In normal doses K@ is only mildly addictive. Think like caffeine.

Where did this myth originate? I'm assuming that it's because someone decided to try to equate K@ and coffee with the whole "in the same family" link that's also discussed below.

-K@ is a close relative of coffee,

K@ is not a close relative of coffee. It's a relative, sure. It's in the same Family, but that's it. It's literally as close to coffee as it is to the DMT producing plant P. viridis. You could also say it's a relative of kava if we go wide enough. This is another tactic used to legitimize K@ when so many other BETTER reasons to speak towards K@'s legitimacy exist. Example: It's ability to lessen withdrawal without inducing a "high" in users looking for help quitting harder opioids. I assume this is said because it's just something that's easy to say and quells people's fears for a moment.

which also affects opioid receptors.

This makes it an opioid. Whether proponents of K@ wish to admit this or not, just by saying "it's not an opiate" doesn't make it "not an opiate/opioid". It's wishful thinking, and as verticity pointed out, could be simple (and malicious) misdirection with the suffix. Example: "My new drug is NOT an opiate. I can verify this with laboratory testing and every scientist will back me up. It's called hydrocodone". This statement would be equally as true as saying that K@ isn't an opiate. It's an opioid. I'll go further. It's an opioid that has affinity for the mu and delta opiate receptors. Call it what it is, so we can address it for what it is. This rhetoric is dangerous and only helps to further confuse people.


Okay, I just wanted to address that part of your message in regards to K@. It needs to be clarified so people aren't confused as to what it is.


I'll say this in regards to the rest of your message:
You've been a solid kava vendor who specialized in unique and potent kavas from all over the pacific. It is an absolute shame A SHAME to tarnish your reputation with selling K@ the same way every other questionable kava bar does. There isn't someone holding a gun to your head, here. There isn't a "K@ Standard" that says you have to offer K@ if you sell kava. You DON'T HAVE TO SELL IT. Please please don't let K@ ride on the coattails and successes of kava by allowing it's presence at your store. You say you've only sold a few...we'll you've also just announced you carry it. Where do you think you'll be in a year from now with K@ sales? I have a clue. "Bula K@ House".

Also, if it's not about the money, please let us know what it's actually about. I'd be a little more settled knowing you were just doing it for the color green. I can't imagine you've just woken up one morning and thought "Let's bring K@ to Portland!"...or at least I hope that isn't the case.

Lastly, you're getting a strong reaction, and probably asking yourself why. It's because we hold you to a high standard. The last person I would have expected to carry K@ was bula kava house. Your reputation for excellence has preceded you. This again further underscores the disappointing nature of this news.

 

[verticity]

Just a point of fact. Coffee is mildly addictive, but that has nothing to do with opiate receptors. The primary active ingredient of coffee is caffeine. It causes a stimulant effect by blocking adenosine receptors in the brain. It has nothing to do with opiate receptors. There are substances in coffee that have been found to have an effect on opiate receptors. These are chemicals known as feruloylquinides. (Ref: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15088081) They do bind to opiate receptors, where they act as antagonists. In other words their effect on these receptors is the opposite of the effect of opioid drugs like K@. If you take some morphine or something, and then drink coffee, the coffee could make the morphine a (very very tiny) little less effective.
The inhibitory constant, Ki, of the main compound in coffee with this effect, 4-CQL, is 4 micromolar.
By way of contrast, the Ki for naloxone is about 0.5 nanomolar.
In other words the 4-CQL found is coffee is 8,000 times less potent as an opiate receptor antagonist than naloxone. Dry roasted coffee beans reportedly contain 1 g/kg of 4-CQL (Ref: T. K. Lim, Edible Medicinal And Non-Medicinal Plants: Volume 5, Fruits, p 692). A cup of coffee is made from about 12 grams of coffee beans. That would contain 12 milligrams of 4-CQL, assuming all of it is extracted in water. A typical effective dose of naloxone is 1-2 mg. The 4-CQL in a cup of coffee would be equivalent to a 0.0015 mg dose of naloxone. Or, to put it differently, you would have to drink 700 cups of coffee for the opiate antagonist effect to be significant.

TL; DR: It's not a myth that coffee effects opiate receptors, but it is a myth that it effects them in any significant way.

That is the science. Here is my opinion: I think K@ should be legal, but I don't think it should be sold in a recreational setting like a bar. I feel very strongly about that. It should not be offered to naive users just because they have some transient pain from working out or something. I would not have a problem if you only sold it online. How about if someone comes in who asks for it or who could obviously benefit from it (not because they have a headache, but because they are trying to manage an opioid addiction, or have severe chronic pain) you could point them to your web site?

 

[ThePiper]

I just think there's a problem when people aren't involved in there own use of herbal medicine. They see on the menu some kind of K@ drink, often with a ridiculous name, and no clue how strong it is going to be. They don't watch or participate in the prep at all, they just get handed a mysterious beverage. It could have 3 grams of K@ in it, or it could have 10, or even extract. And then it is going to be expensive. If people try K@ at the bar, they will go to the bar for more. And that's where the stories of lost paychecks go. No one should have a problem paying for K@. It can easily be found for $2.50-4.00 an ounce online. To give an idea what that means, a typical dose is between 2-7 grams. The largest dose I've ever heard of people taking is 14 grams. K@ does not build the same tolerance as opiates, so you can stay at the same dose for literally years without increasing the amount. So even if someone ate 60 grams of powdered K@ a day (never met someone who has or can do this), it could still be cheaper than a cigarette habit, because if you were buying in bulk it would run maybe $5-8 a day. The idea that people are suffering financially from K@ is either because they are chumps buying from kava bars paying $10 for every glass of tea from a company that seeks to exploit them, or it's just another sensationalist story about how K@ is "like heroin and cocaine combined" that's a real news story I shit you not.

 

[Bula Kava House]

Thanks for the input, guys. A couple points:

I compare K@ to coffee because it is a psychoactive plant related to coffee, and in small amounts is truly about as addictive. @Henry talks about people losing homes and families to K@ addiction. The accounts of severe addiction are by people who abuse it. Most of the time they are taking ridiculously potent extracts or toss and washing huge piles of straight powder throughout the day. It would be impossible to have anything like that happen from two servings of mild hot K@ tea, even if someone were doing it every day. In low doses, whether used for energy or chronic pain, K@ does not cause severe addiction. The withdrawals are similar to what someone would experience from a coffee addiction. How do I know? Because I've researched it, and more importantly, because I've experienced it myself. Of course in modern society, we're not expected to "quit coffee", but for some reason there's a stigma with K@.

Comparing K@ to prescription pain killers is way off base. As @ThePiper points out, K@ doesn't have the addictive potential of opiates. Not even close, really. I've also seen it in the conversations here compared to crack. That's tells me certain people are uneducated about it and definitely don't have any personal experience with it. K@ is a mild natural substance with minimal side effects when taken appropriately. Ya know, like in a mild hot tea.

@Henry You say you don't want kava to be associated with legal highs. Guess what. Kava is a legal high. It's intoxicating, people take it for recreational purposes, and it's legal. It pretty much perfectly fits the definition of a legal high. A long history of traditional use doesn't somehow save it from what it is.

@Kapmcrunk I'm a little confused by your strong objection. I can't seem to find the conversation, but I remember a private correspondence between you and me in which you said you didn't understand why some forum members were so against K@. I thought you said you were totally cool with it. I guess I could be mis-remembering...

I guess I don't see what the "shame" is in selling people a mild, plant based drink that really helps them. To answer your question as to why, it's not about the money, though it will be profitable. Otherwise I wouldn't go out of my way to do any business at all. Mostly, I saw that a good percentage of my regular customers take K@ on occasion. For six years people have been asking us if we sell it, and expressing interest in having it. I was always against it, afraid to associate K@ with kava, or to turn BKH into a K@ bar like so many others. Then a couple things happened. First, the pro K@ lobby beat the DEA. K@ will not be scheduled as a controlled substance any time soon. The responsible users spoke loud enough to force the government to back down. I also started to think more critically about the negative stigma of K@, and realized that it's not really fair. I'm very Libertarian like when it comes to drugs. Especially non-synthetic drugs. I feel that certain plants were put on this earth for a purpose, and K@ has a positive purpose. In my eyes, it doesn't deserve the stigma I was attaching to it.

Second, I realized that unlike bars that have K@ as part of their business model, I'm in a unique position as a successful and profitable kava bar, in which about 80-90% of our sales come from kava. We don't rely on K@, so we can sell it on the side as a mild tea to people that will be helped by it without promoting it. Anybody who has been in to one of the south Florida "kava bars" and has been into ours knows the difference. We are a quiet community place for people to drink kava, work, and maybe socialize a bit. We are full of mostly mature kava drinkers, it's just that many of them take a little K@ from time to time. We will surely attract a few new customers by serving K@, but we will never become Bula K@ House because our kava community is too strong, and because I won't let it happen.

Other than some sensationalizing that's happening, i.e. comparing K@ to crack cocaine and morphine, or talking about people losing their homes, I actually agree with most of your concerns. That's why this is a trial period. If we start to look like a K@ bar, or have addicts lining up outside waiting for us to open, or have people inappropriately associating kava and K@, I can shut it down in a heartbeat. On the other hand, if we sell a few cups a day to people who are really helped by it occasionally, I don't see what the problem is.

It's all about respecting the plant medicines. Just as we don't serve shells of quadruple strength kava with 70% kavalactone extract mixed in, we only serve a mild variety of K@ tea in limited quantities to those who are helped by it. Anyone who wants to get high will need to go somewhere else. Two cups of our tea won't do the trick. Let me work my magic here, guys. I've done a lot for the positive use and sale of kava. I'm not willing to mess that up. Let's wait the 60 days and see what happens. Apparently we have some active forum members with cameras in Portland. If they ever come in and we've got a K@ den they'll report back and you guys can lay into me all you want, but right now doing so is definitely premature.

 

[HeadHodge]

I have never nor probably ever will have the desire to use K@. But I believe (just like tudei) that as long as its legal and enough info is available to make an informed decision, it should be a decision available for the consumer to make.

Just like cigarettes, its not a wise habit to have, but I like the ability to choose. BTW I have never smoked and I know several people that are in a hospice with terminal lung cancer from it.

 

[The Kap'n]

Thanks for the input, guys. A couple points:

I compare K@ to coffee because it is a psychoactive plant related to coffee, and in small amounts is truly about as addictive. @Henry talks about people losing homes, and families to K@ addiction. What I am saying is that in low doses, whether used for energy or chronic pain, K@ does not cause severe addiction. The withdrawals are similar to what someone would experience from a coffee addiction. How do I know? Because I've researched it, and more importantly, because I've experienced it myself. Of course in modern society, we're not expected to "quit coffee", but for some reason there's a stigma with K@.

Comparing K@ to prescription pain killers is way off base. As @ThePiper points out, K@ doesn't have the addictive potential of opiates. Not even close, really. I've also seen it in the conversations here compared crack. That's tells me certain people are uneducated about it and definitely don't have any personal experience with it. K@ is a mild natural substance with minimal side effects when taken appropriately. Ya know, like in a mild hot tea.

@Henry You say you don't want kava to be associated with legal highs. Guess what. Kava is a legal high. It's intoxicating, people take it for recreational purposes, and it's legal. It pretty much perfectly fits the definition of a legal high. A long history of traditional use doesn't somehow save it from what it is.

@Kapmcrunk I'm a little confused by your strong objection. I can't seem to find the conversation, but I remember a private correspondence between you and me in which you said you didn't understand why some forum members were so against K@. I thought you said you were totally cool with it. I guess I could be mis-remembering...

First off, it's not a myth that a normal K@ dependence is similar to caffeine. I know many people, including myself, who have experienced it. The accounts of severe addiction are by people who abuse it. Most of the time they are taking ridiculously potent extracts or toss and washing piles of straight powder throughout the day. It would be impossible to have anything like that happen from two servings of mild hot K@ tea, even if someone were doing it every day.

I guess I don't see what the "shame" is in selling people a mild, plant based drink that really helps them. To answer your question as to why, it's not about the money, though it will be profitable. Otherwise I wouldn't go out of my way to do any business at all. Mostly, I saw that a good percentage of my regular customers take K@ on occasion. For six years people have been asking us if we sell it, and expressing interest in having it. I was always against it, afraid to associate K@ with kava, or to turn BKH into a K@ bar like so many others. Then a couple things happened. First, the pro K@ lobby beat the DEA. K@ will not be scheduled as a controlled substance any time soon. The responsible users spoke loud enough to force the government to back down. I also started to think more critically about the negative stigma of K@, and realized that it's not really fair. I'm very Libertarian like when it comes to drugs. Especially non-synthetic drugs. I feel that certain plants were put on this earth for a purpose, and K@ has a positive purpose. In my eyes, it doesn't deserve the stigma I was attaching to it.

Second, I realized that unlike bars that have K@ as part of their business model, I'm in a unique position as a successful and profitable kava bar, in which about 80-90% of our sales come from kava. We don't rely on K@, so we can sell it on the side as a mild tea to people that will be helped by it without promoting it. Anybody who has been in to one of the south Florida "kava bars" and has been into ours knows the difference. We are a quiet community place for people to drink kava, work, and maybe socialize a bit. We are full of mostly mature kava drinkers, it's just that many of them take a little K@ from time to time. We will surely attract a few new customers by serving K@, but we will never become Bula K@ House because our kava community is too strong, and because I won't let it happen.

Other than some sensationalizing that happening, i.e. comparing K@ to crack cocaine and morphine, or talking about people losing their homes, I actually agree with most of your concerns. That's why this is a trial period. If we start to look like a K@ bar, or have addicts lining up outside waiting for us to open, or have people inappropriately associating kava and K@, I can shut it down in a heartbeat. On the other hand, if we sell a few cups a day to people who are really helped by it occasionally, I don't see what the problem is.

It's all about respecting the plant medicines. Just as we don't serve shells of quadruple strength kava with 70% kavalactone extract mixed in, we only serve a mild variety of K@ tea in limited quantities to those who are helped by it. Anyone who wants to get high will need to go somewhere else. Two cups of our tea won't do the trick. Let me work my magic here, guys. I've done a lot for the positive use and sale of kava. I'm not willing to mess that up. Let's wait the 60 days and see what happens. Apparently we have some active forum members in Portland. If they ever come in and we've got a K@ den they'll report back and you guys can lay into me all you want, but right now doing so is definitely premature.

That is fair. While I am against what you're doing, you have the right to do it. Also, we may have spoken candidly about K@ in the past, (In fact I've personally used K@ to wean myself off of fentanyl) but had you said "I'm thinking about selling K@ at the bar" I would have said what I'm saying now.

 

[verticity]

...
Comparing K@ to prescription pain killers is way off base.
...
Other than some sensationalizing that's happening, i.e. comparing K@ to crack cocaine and morphine, or talking about people losing their homes, I actually agree with most of your concerns. ...

Let's compare K@ to morphine. K@ contains mitragynine, which is a μ-opioid receptor agonist that is less potent than morphine. (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306362398002651). K@ also contains smaller amounts of 7-Hydroxymitragynine. Quote: "7-Hydroxymitragynine is a partial agonist at the μ-opioid receptor with a potency ... that is 30-fold higher than that of mitragynine and 17-fold higher than that of morphine, respectively. As a partial agonist at this receptor it causes significantly less side effects than morphine, like constipation, development of tolerance and withdrawal syndrome upon abstinence." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7-Hydroxymitragynine)

Translation: K@ works in a very similar way to morphine. It's effects are much milder because it is a partial agonist, not a full agonist. It has less adverse effects than morphine. (That's why I think it should remain legal). But it does have adverse effects; it can be addictive, with an opiate-like withdrawal syndrome. (That's why I disagree with it being sold in bars, among other reasons.) The fact that the addictiveness and withdrawal are significantly milder than morphine is a pretty low bar, though. It is perfectly sensible to compare it to morphine, but it would be even more sensible to compare it to something milder like codeine. (Comparison to cocaine does not make sense though. K@ can have some stimulant effect because it also has an effect on serotonin and norepinephrine receptors, but it is not anything like cocaine.)

 

[Bula Kava House]

@verticity I agree that K@ and opiates definitely affect the brain in some similar ways, but the risk of dependence and severity of withdrawal difference is drastic. That difference makes the two classes of drugs worlds apart if you ask me.

Also, don't discount the price difference. A heroine or even prescription pain killer addiction will cost someone hundreds of dollars everyday, leading to crime, and strain on family and professional life. Even the worst K@ addiction might cost $5-$10 a day. We're moving into a more general K@ conversation here though, as the amount of K@ someone could ingest daily at BKH isn't enough to cause severe dependence.

 

[verticity]

@verticity I agree that K@ and opiates definitely affect the brain in some similar ways, but the risk of dependence and severity of withdrawal difference is drastic. That difference makes the two classes of drugs worlds apart if you ask me.

Also, don't discount the price difference. A heroine or even prescription pain killer addiction will cost someone hundreds of dollars everyday, leading to crime, and strain on family and professional life. Even the worst K@ addiction might cost $5-$10 a day. We're moving into a more general K@ conversation here though, as the amount of K@ someone could ingest daily at BKH isn't enough to cause severe dependence.

Well, sure. My point is not that K@ is "bad". It's a useful medicine. It's just my opinion that it doesn't belong in kava bars. Of course, you are the owner so you can do what you want.

 

[sɥɐʞɐs]

While I share the same worries about the possible repercussions of associating kava with K@ and would prefer them to never exist under the same roof in a kava bar, or even occupy a similar space in people's minds...I am willing acknowledge this view is really only of such high importance, to us, a very small minority of knowledgeable kava enthusiasts who are rightfully worried about proctecting kavas image and legality.

That being said, restaurants everywhere sell regular beverages that are of minimal risk(soda, coffee, tea) and they also sell alcohol, which is of high risk and can offer withdrawals worse than heroin. One roof, two liquids, one can be deadly, both legal, completely accepted generally everywhere.

I imagine it's hard to leave money on the table when both items are legal, you're giving customers what they want and getting to profit from it at the same time.

 

[The Kap'n]

While I share the same worries about the possible repercussions of associating kava with K@ and would prefer them to never exist under the same roof in a kava bar, or even occupy a similar space in people's minds...I am willing acknowledge this view is really only of such high importance, to us, a very small minority of knowledgeable kava enthusiasts who are rightfully worried about proctecting kavas image and legality.

That being said, restaurants everywhere sell regular beverages that are of minimal risk(soda, coffee, tea) and they also sell alcohol, which is of high risk and can offer withdrawals worse than heroin. One roof, two liquids, one can be deadly, both legal, completely accepted generally everywhere.

I imagine it's hard to leave money on the table when both items are legal, you're giving customers what they want and getting to profit from it at the same time.

They actually are required to cover that additional risk. You'd be required to have a liquor license. You'd also be required to put up a large cash bond ($10k in TN). Then you start having to talk about liquor liability insurance, training etc... Or your state may have a beer permit that only requires a monthly fee for only selling beer. The legislature just doesn't exist with K@ leaving the door wide open to...well...what we're seeing now.

 

[TheKavaSociety]

They actually are required to cover that additional risk. You'd be required to have a liquor license. You'd also be required to put up a large cash bond ($10k in TN). Then you start having to talk about liquor liability insurance, training etc... Or your state may have a beer permit that only requires a monthly fee for only selling beer. The legislature just doesn't exist with K@ leaving the door wide open to...well...what we're seeing now.

Isn't it actually technically ILLEGAL to sell K@ for human consumption? http://www.ilovekratom.com/[email protected]

 

[sɥɐʞɐs]

They actually are required to cover that additional risk. You'd be required to have a liquor license. You'd also be required to put up a large cash bond ($10k in TN). Then you start having to talk about liquor liability insurance, training etc... Or your state may have a beer permit that only requires a monthly fee for only selling beer. The legislature just doesn't exist with K@ leaving the door wide open to...well...what we're seeing now.

But the issue at hand isn't really about licenses is it? I'm fairly certain the reaction would be the same even if such a thing existed as a 'K@ license' and Judd had obtained one. Licenses don't change biological risks of a substance of a substance, obviously.

Perhaps the greater issue is the lack of familiarity and education the average person has when it comes to kava and K@. It's easy for the average person or newcomer to confuse the two. I kinda wish K@ didn't start with "k"...I think something that simple could help a little bit with the conflation.

Maybe the name fauxpium would be better suited for K@, but it's too late for that now.

 

[The Kap'n]

But the issue at hand isn't really about licenses is it? I'm fairly certain the reaction would be the same even if such a thing existed as a 'K@ license' and Judd had obtained one. Licenses don't change biological risks of a substance of a substance, obviously.

Perhaps the greater issue is the lack a familiarity and education the average person has when it comes to kava and K@. It's easy for the average person or newcomer to confuse the two. I kinda wish K@ didn't start with "k"...I think something that simple could help a little bit with the conflation.

Maybe the name fauxpium would be better suited for K@, but it's too late for that now.

The reaction would be the very same. I 100% agree, and you're right. It doesn't change the risks, for sure. I think my point was that it's rather difficult to up and suddenly begin selling alcohol when you've been selling tea and sodas for years.

I'm also with you on the K's. Makes me wonder if they weren't similar in name, would they even be sold together.

 

[TheKavaSociety]

The reaction would be the very same. I 100% agree, and you're right. It doesn't change the risks, for sure. I think my point was that it's rather difficult to up and suddenly begin selling alcohol when you've been selling tea and sodas for years.

I'm also with you on the K's. Makes me wonder if they weren't similar in name, would they even be sold together.

Yea, the problem is that few people know enough about K@ or even kava to make an informed decision when they are introduced to these substances in a commercial setting. Sure, we all support people's right to decide what to use/eat/drink, but we don't exist in a cultural vacuum. When people go to a bakery and order a cake they *assume* it's safe. They don't spend hours researching every single ingredient used in its production. When someone goes to a cafe and sees a new "tea" (or a sign saying "try our new tea") they are likely to assume it's a safe product. They see a legitimate business, friendy bar tenders, patrons enjoying the hot "tea". Sure, these silly people should do more research before they try just about anything they ever see. But they don't. Instead, they trust that some institution would surely require mandatory labelling or another regulatory regime should this thing be unsafe or stronger than coffee.

Whether we like it or not, the "war on drugs" has created a culture that assumes that everything that's legal is surely both safe and psychoactively ineffective.

 

[TheKavaSociety]

Anyway, I suppose it mustbe amazingly profitable (otherwise why would so many people rosk prosecution?), so I understand why you guys have felt so tempted to add krat to your bar. And I acknwoledge that you may well be America's most responsible K@ bar. But I personally agree with your earlier statement: bars that sell other substances shouldconsider changing their name to "exotic teas bars" etc in order to keep things both honest and safe for kava

 

[HeadHodge]

Ive gone through the whole alcohol licensing hoops when we owned a small marina in Oregon.
Its bass ackwards IMO. Its geared towards educating the staff to understand and enforce the state laws for the sale of liquor.

I belive it would be immensely better if they modeled the program after the way their boating licensing works. The way that works is that a person cannot operate any sort of boat without a boating license. To get one, the person has to take an online class on a state provided boating safety course. It shifts the responsibility from someone like me who rented boats and gears it to the operator of the boat.

In my vision a consumer would not be able to buy kava, K@, booze, cigarettes without a valid purchasing permit or license. The only way you can get the card is to get educated and pass a test and be of adult age.

It use to work that way too for obtaining a gun in Colorado. A long time ago I had bought a shot gun to rabbit hunting with friends when I was stationed there,

 

[TheKavaSociety]

Ive gone through the whole alcohol licensing hoops when we owned a small marina in Oregon.
Its bass ackwards IMO. Its geared towards educating the staff to understand and enforce the state laws for the sale of liquor.

I belive it would be immensely better if they modeled the program after the way their boating licensing works. The way that works is that a person cannot operate any sort of boat without a boating license. To get one, the person has to take an online class on a state provided boating safety course. It shifts the responsibility from someone like me who rented boats and gears it to the operator of the boat.

In my vision a consumer would not be able to buy kava, K@, booze, cigarettes without a valid purchasing permit or license. The only way you can get the card is to get educated and pass a test and be of adult age.

It use to work that way too for obtaining a gun in Colorado. A long time ago I had bought a shot gun to rabbit hunting with friends when I was stationed there,

That's an interesting and novel idea, but I suppose it would be a bit pointless for substances that are so commonly used as most people do understand the consequences of drinking booze but choose to ignore them.. But it could indeed perhaps work for new drugs? I am not sure. I suppose for me there's a difference between substances that are used as food and substances that are used for medical purposes. The former should be generally considered as safe, i.e. can be taken by an average person with an acceptably low level of health risk (kava is classified as such by the World Health Organisation). By contrast, the latter are potentially risky, but in some cases the benefits outweight the risks and as such they are legally accessible, but are often regulated (anything from mandatory labelling to prescriptions etc). I personally believe K@ potentially belongs to the medical category and not the food category, on the basis of literally thousands of reports of severe addiction and because there doesn't seem to be any traditional culture of K@ consumption as a social beverage.

I know Judd and others claim K@ is as addictive as coffee. But unless /r/quittingkratom is a platform populated by apx 2000 liars, it appears that its potential for causing extreme levels of addiction. Unfortunately K@ is very poorly researched so it's hard to know exactly how addictive this stuff is, but the very fact that for every 100 papers on kava there's just one paper on K@ suggests that we need to treat these substances differently.

 

[HeadHodge]

Well I sort of disagree on people generally educated about booze, because after drinking since I was 16, I didnt really understand how booze affected my body until just a few short years ago. If I understood then what I know now, there may have been a possibility I would have been drinking kava instead.

Another thing I like about my concept is that it can be implemented and self enforced by the industry. You dont have to wait for the govt to impose it.

Maybe somthing good for an association or special interest group to take on.