Kratom Industry Says Synthetic Opioids Shouldn’t Be Labeled Kratom

Representatives of the kratom industry are urging officials and the public not to describe synthetic opioids as kratom following the deaths of two University of Mississippi students. The debate intensified after early reports in the Ole Miss case referred to products found near the students as “packaged kratom” or “synthetic kratom,” language the industry says wrongly links traditional kratom leaf to chemically altered substances.

Court records show Aidan Hamilton, 18, and Robert Strang, 20, were found dead on Sept. 21 in separate locations. Investigators later narrowed their wording. In a Sept. 30 statement, Lafayette County Metro Narcotics said only that “packaging associated with kratom-related products” was recovered at both scenes. Toxicology results from the medical examiner remain pending.

According to court documents, packaging found near both students carried the name Modus. An affidavit identified the tablets as Smax Pseudo-DHM and listed pseudoindoxyl and MGM-15(DHM) among the ingredients on the package found near Hamilton.

Industry response to the wording

Mac Haddow, senior fellow on public policy at the American Kratom Association, said the initial characterization raised immediate concern. He told Fox News Digital that it would be highly unlikely for a natural kratom leaf product to independently cause two deaths, and said the later clarification suggested the recovered items were not traditional kratom products.

Haddow argued that the substances described in the documents were chemically manipulated opioids and, in his view, should be treated as controlled substances rather than marketed under the kratom name. He also questioned why such products were available if they fell outside what Mississippi law allows.

Mississippi’s Kratom Consumer Protection Act regulates kratom sales instead of banning the plant outright. The law sets standards for sellers, product labeling and allowable formulations, while prohibiting certain adulterated or high-potency products. Haddow said the case highlights the need for stronger enforcement of those existing rules.

Natural leaf vs. altered compounds

Haddow said natural kratom leaf has been used for centuries in Southeast Asia. He maintained there are no published reports of deaths tied to traditional leaf use in that region, though medical literature has described some adverse effects linked to long-term use. He also repeated a common claim that kratom spread in the U.S. after the Vietnam War, while acknowledging researchers have not substantiated that origin story in published literature.

Federal agencies have scrutinized kratom for years. The FDA issued an import alert on kratom products in 2012, and the DEA in 2016 moved to temporarily place kratom’s primary alkaloids into Schedule I before withdrawing the proposal after public comment. More recently, both agencies have warned about concentrated and chemically modified products, including those containing high levels of 7-hydroxymitragynine, or 7-OH.

Haddow said compounds such as pseudoindoxyl, MGM-15 and MGM-16 should not be considered kratom at all. In his view, they are synthetic opioids that should be addressed by federal and local law enforcement under existing law.

Regulation remains the central issue

The association says it supports tighter regulation of natural kratom products rather than prohibition. Haddow called for testing, accurate labeling and age restrictions, saying access should be limited to adults 21 and older. He also pointed to an NIH-led study evaluating whether purified mitragynine, the plant’s main alkaloid, could have a role in treating opioid use disorder.

The FDA, however, continues to state that kratom has not been approved for any medical use. The agency has also warned about risks including dependence, contamination and adverse events. As the Ole Miss investigation continues, the distinction between natural kratom leaf and synthetic opioid products is likely to remain central to the public discussion.