H.B. 387 Kratom Modifications: transcript

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you committee for your patience and grace in, uh, allowing me to present first. So, I know that there's been a lot of, uh, confusion around and concern around raum legislation this year, and I am, uh, looking forward to the opportunity, opportunity to, um, clear up some, uh, questions, um, and possible concerns. So, first, I'll go through HB 3 87 really quickly. There is a bit of history behind this last year. Um, the house worked really hard on a bill to create a regulatory framework for our freedom industry. And unfortunately, um, that bill was killed in the Senate. And so we ended up with another year in our state with no meaningful opportunity, no statutory authority to really give our regulatory agencies the, um, the ability to regulate the Kratom industry. And so, recognizing that there are Kratom products, kre extracts, creto, um, synthetics, and other com compounded products that are showing increased risk and danger sometimes and far too often leading to deaths of, um, Utah citizens. Um, it's become really apparent and reaching, uh, a critical stage where we need to make sure that we are more proactive in making sure that any crad products that are available for sale in the state of Utah are as safe as they can be. And to be sure there are so many krato products that are available for sale in any retailer, any gas station, um, in kiosks that are extremely dangerous and extremely addictive. So, HB 3 87, recognizing that there are some other pushes to ban Kratom, um, I wanted to be cognizant of the fact that in these, you know, in the political world, that bill that is being presented and considered may pass the legislature. It may not, um, if it did pass, there is a possibility that it could be vetoed. There is the possibility that the federal government could pass legislation that preempts any ban that a state may have implemented if the ban were to pass. And I am not here to speak for or against that, but if it were to pass and we found ourselves in a place where we could not, um, in enforce our own policy, we would be left with what we have now. And that's a regulatory vacuum. And that is what is unacceptable. We don't have statutory, um, language that gives our regulatory agency, which is the Utah Department of Agriculture and Food, the, um, authority that they need to regulate any crem product. And so what this does is it does limit the type ofum products that would be legal and gives the department the ability to regulate and the statutory authority. Um, you may not know that the, the department did try to regulate some products, and, um, there was a lawsuit filed and the department had to pull back that lawsuit, um, because there was a concern that the statute did not, um, give them adequate authority. And so appropriately, they've asked us as a legislature to come back and consider that giving them the authority to do the job that we've asked them to do. And that's to keep people safe and make sure that the products that are for sale in the state of Utah, um, are products that are not going to kill people. So, um, this sets, so, like I said, this sets up a regulatory framework and it has a trigger. It only goes into effect if we, if a a ban, for example, does not pass, or if it does and is overturned to any point, we would have that regulatory framework that is currently exists in a vacuum. Um, so one of the questions that I've received from many legislators is how this interacts with other le pieces of legislation. I've addressed the possible ban legislation that is, uh, that has started in the Senate. Um, another bill that, um, is I am floor sponsor on does create, um, a tax and a registration fee for CRE products. It also has a trigger so that if CRE products are legal, then the Department of Agriculture and Food has a funding mechanism to do the actual work of regulating, um, the industry. And so that's how that senate bill, which is Senator Vickers bill, and this bill that we're, is at discussion right now, interact with one another. And so they're meant to be puzzle pieces that go together. Um, and, you know, that was, that was really intentional. We were trying to be very thoughtful about how we create safety standards and regulatory, um, a, a me a meaningful regulatory framework around, uh, this industry. With that, I'm open to questions.

Yeah, thanks, Mr. Vice Chair. I appreciate the, uh, structure that you're trying to set up here around this, uh, product. I, I'm, I'm trying to quickly read through this last part. So the, the alkaloids, uh, the 70 G, I think is, it's called, is that, is that band in this the synthetic?

Yeah, so these are the, met Speciosa is a controlled substance, and it would be the synthetics.

Alright. Thank you.

Mr. Chair, just, so, just to make sure I'm absolutely crystal clear. So if the, uh, complete ban on CRE bill passes, this bill would be dormant in case something happened. And so this is a backup plan. Well, in it's another way of thinking about this so that there's least some regulation for safety. Correct.

Yeah. I, um, after many discussions, um, there, I, I recognize that there was among many legislators, a sincere desire to ban Kratom. And I had, I opened this bill file and drafted this recognizing that that may or may not happen, and wanted to make sure that we're not left in the same situation for another year, where our regulatory agency had no legal authority to regulate the, any of the products.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Let me see if I can get back to the bill. There we go. Uh, line 79, uh, starting from 69 down CRE process or CRE retailer may not prepare, possess, distribute, sell, offer CRE product that includes any CRE extract. Isn't that ineffective a ban?

Uh, no, because crem, pure leaf creto powdered is still a Kratom product. Um, the extracts are the ones that are dangerous and get to those really high potency, um, levels that become dangerous. So those were restricting in this bill.

Okay. So an extract by definition is something other than just the Pure Leaf powder, is that by saying this, it goes right to just the leaf powder? Is that correct? Okay.

The way the bill is currently drafted.

And then how do we, how do we reconcile the, I mean, I'm just, I've looked up a little bit of this in the past. We had hearings over the interim, I mean, dramatic increase in, you know, poison center, CDC calls, uh, I mean like tenfold increase in, in things like that. How do we reconcile that with this bill to tacitly allow and approve or impli not even implicitly, right. That we directly tacit, authorize and, and approve.

Um, I think that this is what I would consider a pragmatic approach because I do, I have spoken with a lot of people who have found value in pure Leaf kratom as a, as a treatment mechanism. Um, the science, I've, I have looked at a number of studies. I would say that scientifically the jury's still out, that it, there, there's not a lot of conclusive evidence one way or another. Um, I, I am wary of keeping any cred products legal, but I have heard sincere stories from people who have found true recovery using Pure Leaf products, and in a desire to, to again, be pragmatic and concede that not all is known. That that was, it seemed like a, a reasonable compromise to make sure that that pure product as it was, you know, originally used and originally discovered, would still be available. But recognizing that you're right, representative, the, the number of overdoses and deaths has skyrocketed. It's a J curb right now. We are seeing magnitudes, more people getting sick, and dozens of Utahans died last year from crayon.

If I may, one last question. So then how, I guess it, maybe a compound question, but how can we tell the difference between they're using just the Pure Leaf versus an extract? How difficult is that and how do we enforce under this bill, uh, violations, uh, selling adulterating, you know, any of those sorts of things? So

If it's, if I may, Mr. Chair, I would invite Dr. Forsyth up from, uh, department of Agriculture and Food, and he could probably speak more. Um, I was just gonna ask If you'd like to come up More eloquently to me than I could on that. Um, but it largely has to do with the fact that they've built up some expertise and testing capacity already. We just need to give them the ability to actually put, we need, they need teeth in the law to regulate.

Absolutely. I'm Dr. Brandon Forsyth, director of the Laboratory Services Division, as well as the cannabis and well Specialized products division at the Utah Department of Agriculture and Food. That's a job. So there are really two classes of products that we're talking about here with k*m. There's the flower products and your concentrates concentrates have had their crate alkaloids extracted from the plant material so that they can be incorporated into secondary products. Um, typically the products we'll find out there are either little shots or gummies, things like that. Mm-hmm. Um, where the flour is used to make a, a tea at home, or not the flour, but the leaf is used to make a tea at home. So the types of products that we're having the biggest issues with and what we're seeing, um, involved in poison control calls, things like that, are these extracted products. Not to say that there's not potential for abuse or for issues with the leaf, but the main problems that we're seeing are with the extracted products.

And, and for the question, how difficult is it for you to then tell if it's just the leaf or if it's an extract or combination? I mean, how hard is that to,

So ultimately it would be fairly easy for us to detect if they do it badly, right? So if they include any synthetic alkaloids or if they put a bunch of 7 0 8 in there, we have the ability to find that stuff quite easily at our laboratory. Mm-hmm. Um, if they made an exact copy of LEAF where there was, you know, they added cellulose in there to make it look like plant material. Um, and then they added a little bit of CRE extract or seven hydroxy Alpine, just a tiny bit of that, and a little bit of Alpine. So it, like basically identically mimicked the chemical profile of CRE leaf. That would be hard, but we also wouldn't be as concerned with that because now it's basically the leaf. So what these components that we're really concerned about are those synthetics and the really high seven oh h and this already takes care of

Those issues. Right. Okay. Thank you.

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair, members of the committee. Um, my name is Amber Brown. I'm Deputy Commissioner for the Department of Agriculture and Food. Um, I just kind of wanna sort of echo kind of what Dr. For Forthe has said. Um, we, we support this bill. We appreciate the sponsor running it this year. Um, there are a lot of Creon bills out there, and there's some difficult decisions that the legislature will need to make on these issues. But from our perspective, as the agency that's tasked with regulating these products, uh, we feel it's very important if Kratom is legal in Utah, that these limitations be set on them so that only pure Leaf creto products are allowed to be sold. Because the extracted products, the synthetic products and the products that are mixed with other substantive are, are, are more dangerous given our experience in regulating this and trying to regulate this over the last several years. So we appreciate the, um, guardrails that this puts in place, and, uh, we hope that the committee will support the bill. Thank you.

Hi, my name is Joel Badger. Um, I'm originally from Mapleton. I'm a, I'm from, You wanna speak right into the mic. Thank you. Yeah. Um, and I live in Lehi. I am the owner of Grow cre, um, on 900 South. Um, first thing I have had nobody come in to talk to me. We're essentially, we view it as like a create dispensary of sorts, although we don't make any medical claims whatsoever. Um, the Utah Department of Food and Agriculture has been great to work with on this. Some of the regulations have been difficult for us. Um, we've never sold seven OHM. Um, we are just trying to be responsible. We don't think it's worth selling. Um, we think it's dangerous. We've heard people's stories. We try and follow those closely. Our customers are the most normal people. I mean, these are like police officers, teachers. We have tons of nurses, nurse practitioners, um, we have doctors come in, lawyers like firefighters. This is, um, I worry that some of these things would affect those people really negatively. Um, the other thing here is, um, with extracts, um, some of 'em have ine and lower concentrations than the actual leaf. The leaf has a, you know, roughly the same potency as, um, like ground coffee. So something like, you know, one 2%. Um, so, you know, like a normal say a, a seltzer, it's essentially just like a, a tincture, a very light tincture, um, has about 45 milligrams. That's two and a half grams of Creon. Two and a half grams of creto is a teaspoon.

Okay, go Ahead. No problem. Uh, Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, my name is Dalton Locke. I represent, uh, a company and I'm a founder of Diversified Botanics in Draper, Utah. Last year we put over $30 million into our company. We have over 85 employees. And so you're gonna hear two words that sound alike, but mean completely different things. One is a natural extract. The other synthetic drug is the committee. If the committee cannot tell the difference, Utah is going to pay this price. I'm not here to ask you to go easy on this industry. I'm asking you to actually go harder in the right direction. Though I've worked in this industry before anybody even knew what the word kratom was. Before Theum Consumer Protection Act, before the Utah became the model, the rest of the nation followed. I know the plant, I know who uses it, and I know what companies do the right things and which ones cut corners. And that's exactly why I'm standing in front of you today. I'm asking you for stronger rules, not weaker ones, stronger ones, because I will not watch bad actors drag down our industry. That's helped millions of Americans. And I will not stand by while the legislation bans a product that works to go after the product that's already illegal. Let me be absolutely clear about what's at stake here. There's a claim circulating that natural crem extracts are the same thing as synthetic seven hydroxy tablets. This claim is inaccurate, it's dangerously wrong, and the legislation acts on it. You will ban the safe product while doing nothing to stop the dangerous one. Natural extracts are made with water, citric acid, and glycerin. They preserve all 40 plus compounds found in Kratom the way that nature designed them. When your body processes natural kratom, your liver controls exactly how much 7 0 8 is released. There's a biological ceiling, a hard limit. The body cannot produce more than it can safely handle. Synthetic 7 0 8 are laboratory products. They are manmade, they're concentrated, they're isolates that bypass your liver entirely. There is no natural limits on them, no biological breaks, and your blood level spikes 15 to 20 times stronger. This is not the same product. This is a variant, or excuse me, this is not a variant of the same product. It is a completely different substance. And the Utah law already exists to protect this. We agree with this restriction. We support it. So let me give you an analogy so I can make this very clear to your constituents banning natural cranium extracts. Because seven synthetics would like be like banning espresso because caffeine pills sent someone to an emergency room. They are not the same thing. I'm listening over and over as I keep hearing that more and more people are going to the CDC, meaning that they are having a, uh, a reaction to this. Well, what we've seen, and we know that seven oh h has entirely penetrated our stores and the people selling it, it's very dangerous. And I have been speaking against this for a long time because when they look at 7 0 8, which we just heard recently, they can't tell the difference in the alkaloid. So all of a sudden, more and more people are getting sick. What I'm suggesting though, is regulation. I'm suggesting that we have like actual meter sizes, meaning serving sizes like you would have with any other product. So that way that the consumers, when they go in, they know exactly what they're purchasing. So I have a couple other things to say to you guys as far as that. I think there's a couple different places where we can really create regulation, and that is metered serving sizes, like I said, nitrogen content that's printed childproof bottles with every single extract and an age restriction of 21 and older. And that we sell this product behind the counter where it belongs. We as a company don't want this falling into the wrong hands. At the same time though, there is millions of Americans that need this because Utah was the first place to do this, originally for the KCPA and I believe Utah can be the gold standard and do things right.

Thank you, Mr. Vice-Chair. I curious about your comments. You said you're in favor of more rules for this, correct? Uh, I know you mentioned a few of them there, but what other regulations would you want around Kratom to help keep it safe?

Absolutely. So whether it is sold in a gas station, which I believe is a very safe place for it, so that people are not having to go to places like smoke shops where they might feel uncomfortable or other tobacco stores, I think we should be able to sell it there. Also, I think you should be behind the counter. I think you should be 21 and older. And as I said before, you want to make sure that you have mer uh, metered serving sizes. It's extremely important. You want to know that the companies that is selling you something, that they're going through the KCPA, that they are GMP, that they're making sure they're doing all of the right testing so that when you as a consumer get that product, it's safe. I, I've been doing the science on this. We've been doing tons of research and spent millions of dollars in this space because I wanna make sure my mom, my grandma, or whoever is, is using Kratom that is safe for them. Thank you. Thank you very

Thanks, Mr. Vice Chair. One narrative I've heard is that these products are marketed to kids. Can you speak to that? Are these products marketed to

Kids? I ab absolutely. I can, uh, speak to that. Um, let me just pull this study up really quickly because I think it's something that's really valuable. Um, the substance abuse and Mental Health Service administration, they've conducted the largest national drug survey in America, and they're finding that adolescent crate abuse as less than half of 1%, meaning less than half a percent. The average Crate User Action America though, is 40 years old. Just like we heard over here. These are, these are adults, these are police officers, these are veterans. These are people that can't find solutions from other people. If they did, they would have it. They don't want to take cannabis. They, they don't want to take opiates. They don't want to do these things. And so what we're suggesting in the state of Utah is to take something away that has been helping millions and millions of people for a long, long time. You know, I didn't invent Kratom. Kratom comes from Southeast Asia. It's been used for a long time. And actually in Thailand where they banned it originally in 2016 and December, they actually on December 25th, they all of a sudden then decided they were going to keep it in commerce. So we're seeing people reversing these things all over the place because Kratom saves lives.

Thank you, Mr. Vice Chair. Uh, I've got a question. Uh, first of all, I want to just say I, this is the first committee hearing that I've ever had where I have serious beard envy, um, everybody in the audience, good work. Um, when I go into a gas station, how do I know that what I'm buying is safe, creative versus unsafe?

Creative are, are, there are both available in our gas stations currently. So I can tell you if there's a major distribution company, like, we'll say for instance, I know that we've seen this in Mavericks and other gas stations, right? Those people that are selling that product, they only selling products that are FDA certified. Meaning that they've gone through all the testing that would be in a GMP facility. They should be doing their own studies. U DAF would be looking at those products, which is why we actually got behind and we said, listen, this needs to be taxed more. And those people that are actually putting products in there that are dangerous, they should get fined not $5,000. That's a slap on their wrist. Like that's no big deal. So what I'm saying to you is that the store owner at that level would be the one that would actually be doing to making sure that it's safe to put into their store. Right? That's the big thing that we look at because you have to have the testing behind all this stuff. I can't talk for anybody that's doing whatever they're doing because I'm not them. I can tell you, we go through rigorous testings. We have a lab in our facility that's a scientific lab. We do all of our own testing. After we do our testing, it's then sent out to an independent, uh, facility to test and you'd, after they come in and they take our samples, they go into stores and they take our samples. So I only can speak for us, but we wanna be on the front end of science when it comes to this.

I'm one of those people that he talked about that is the creto consumer that has had their life change because of this product. I'm actually have been consuming Creto daily for nine years. I have a really severe facial nerve disease called trigeminal neuralgia that they call the suicide disease. And I'm telling you, I wake up every single day at a level nine and it's, I, I just cannot function. And I was able to find that Kratom helped me nine years ago and it's truly been life changing. I I consume only, uh, natural leaf kratom and that is what absolutely should be on the shelf and it should be regulated. I agree a hundred percent with what he said. Make sure that you have, you know, sufficient fines in place for the bad players if they, if they crop up. Um, what, what, this has been absolutely terrifying. I'll tell you during this entire session to realize that my livelihood is on the line here. It's, it's absolutely terrifying to think that I, that the literal medicine that I use to, to help control my pain could be taken away from me. I am a hundred percent in support of crate products, including natural CRE extracts. They are made with food grade solvents that the FDA approves. There's a lot of people that have pain like I do. I only take the plain powder, but I do know several people, especially with people with digestion problems that have like Crohn's disease or diverticulitis that cannot handle the plant matter. So they're able to take the actual extracts, which are plant powder. It is not seven oh h um, that's not what we're talking about. I'm a hundred percent, um, against any seven oh h products being sold. One thing I have to say though is that I do believe that the seven oh h uh, laws need to be enforced here and needs to be improved. I know for me as a, as a test case, I had decided I was gonna see if I could actually order seven oh h products online and just, you know, it's, it's, you can't legally buy them here in Utah. It's right, says in the KCPA and I have not, I'll be honest, I have not seen them on the shelves. I do know that I'm sure people sell them under, under the counter, behind the, you know, black market. But, um, I was able to order them and I got them in two days. So again, it's, it's one of those things. I just really truly believe that there's a way to do this. Um, there are enclosing, there are a couple things again that I really like about the bill. I appreciate the 21 and up and I love the fact that we need, we absolutely need to get 7 0 8 off the market.

Oh, I'm sorry. Yes. It's Laura Romney and I live, excuse me. I live in Davis County. Okay,

Yeah, it's trigeminal Tri Neuralgia. Trigenal. Okay. Yeah, I have it on the top half of my face. Thank you. It's like constant 24 7 burning. Okay. Got it. Thank you. I appreciate it. Nerve pain. Yeah, but I'm happy to answer any questions. Okay.

My name's Walter Plum. I'm the president of, uh, drug Safe Utah. We support a total ban on this product, but as a contingency, I would say in addressing this bill, I might point out that there's probably about 40 alkaloids in the leaf that comes from Southeast Asia. If you looked at that, and this is just the natural creto leaf on a tragedy, Janine, it would be approximately one point a half percent and 7 0 8 would be less than one 10th of 1%. My suggestion on this bill, it has a 2% limit, which should be for tenths of 1%, as in bill Senate bill 48 2% is unnatural. And it, it's not in the nature of the plant. There is no safe limit for, uh, Crate Raum. It's at low doses. It's a stimulant at higher doses or regular use, addictive use. It becomes an OPI opioid opioid. And so my suggestion is lower 2% to 0.4 tenths of a percent. And the other thing, this product, if you go into a gas station, it's sold along with five hour energy along on the same right next to it on a large gas station retailer, there should be warning le levels that warn against addiction, cardiovascular problems, liver problems, and addiction that go and associated with this drug. This bill needs a warning level of warning a label in it too. Thank you.

Um, I, I guess I'm here representing the fact that I'm up to my eyeballs and create 'em this session and have been all through the interim. Uh, just wanted to comment on a couple of things that I've been, been over here. I'm here to present another bill. But I'd like to, you know, I think Representative Dailey-Provost has done a really good job of presenting the bill to you kinda understanding we're put, we're moving this through as can we kind of of move this through the, the session at some point in time, we have to determine, uh, whether we're going to support a full ban, which, uh, would take really move a lot of these, the need for a lot of these bills off the table. Or if we are, and I'm hearing that there's more support for allowing, you know, a natural CRETO type product. We actually started talking about this type of regulation, um, a year ago when before we started talking about a ban. So the, as you move forward, if we're going to allow a certain, you know, a, a raw crem product in some form sold somewhere yet to be determined, you do need tight regulation around it. And so I think that's what the representative is trying to do with this bill. So they are companion at this point until we kind of really decide, you know, what policy we're going to move through with. Uh, the part is, you know, and, and Mr. Plum brought up the fact of the 2% in the, so the bill that I'm running is actually dealing with 7 0 8, you know, and taking, making it a schedule one in that we did leave a door open for trace amounts of, of the alkaloid in, in creto, but we've defined it as 2% of the crem alkaloid. So that's what brings that down to, I think, the 4.4% that he's talking about. So that, and I haven't looked at it in this bill, so that may be something you wanna look at, but I'm just trying to give some clarity to you kind help you understand, uh, voting for against this bill doesn't mean that krems going to be sold or not being going to be sold, but if, if we are going to sell the product, allow it to be sold in any form at anywhere. Uh, and that's like I say, yet to be determined where, and by the way, I was, I, you know, um, I think there was a statement by one of the testifiers that said, you know, allowing the owner, the business determine what's safe. That's not right. We need to determine upfront with regulation like this, what's what's should be, should be or should not be sold. So I don't know if that helps you or not just confuses you more. But, uh,

I, I appreciate your comment and if you could stick around, it looks like we have a couple questions. I don't know, I'm, I, I know you, uh, with your pharmacy background, I'm a, I I think I'm the only chemical engineer in the legislature, but I'd like to see some research that shows like what is, what kind of thresholds are addictive, what I'd like to see research around it. And I, I don't know. I think, I think what you guys are doing are start starting to develop a framework. You know, it's, it's very new. It's, there's, there's really not enough out there. But I'd like to, this probably isn't gonna even be solved this session, but it'll probably over the years, we should be thinking about what kind of research is out there. I I read a lot over the weekend. I didn't know what to trust and what not to trust, what was funded by the cred industry, what was not. And so it's, it's, uh, I'd really liked, you know, from a science perspective, just to know what is real and what's not. So, um, maybe that's something we can task some of our universities to do or something start to, to get behind with

Your permission if, if I, yeah, go ahead. Give you a little bit of help on that. Uh, seven hydroxy and very small amounts is very dangerous. It's 20 times more potent than morphine. So that, you know, that's the step front. And I, Mr. Plum talked about that, the fact that how, how dangerous it is. So the, you know, in, in a very small amount, very small trace amounts in per your rock kratom, you really have to do, have a, a big truckload of, you know, stuff to get to that point. But it doesn't take a lot. And, uh, but, and just to remember that seven hydroxy is a very deadly product. It's very dangerous. And at the very least, we need to get that off the table for our consumers.

Thank you. So I know that we're not debating your bill too much. Yeah. But how does your bill address the synthetic

It? So my bill basically makes seven hydroxy a schedule one narcotic, which means it has deemed to have no medicinal value, which means that it's illegal to sell in the state of Utah. Uh, it does have a small, it does allow for the, uh, trace amounts left and create 'em. So the bill is patterned after a bill that was, uh, run in Florida, that was passed in Florida. Uh, although I felt like that their definition of trace amounts was allowing too much seven hydroxy in it. So we tightened it down to a very small minute amount that, uh, could be, you know, actually in a raw creto plant, but it would actually move seven hydroxy to the point where it is illegal to sell in the state. Except for that one small exception. If, uh, the ban bill, which is the seven Senate bill 45, was to pass in its current, uh, version, it would ban all alkaloids related to the Creon plant, which means all alkaloids, including seven oh h, which then they would all be taken off the table.

Oh, thank you, Mr. Chair. So Senator, it, it seems, in looking at some of the things on this, a couple of the major concerns are dosing and cross-contamination. Would it make sense to have this be like an over the counter product at a pharmacy? I mean, whatever we're doing with dosing, if we're not gonna ban it, it, it seems like having it be at seven 11 next to the five hour energy is probably not the best way to treat trigeminal neuralgia, perhaps, but, but having it, you know, where we can see how it's being dosed and, and verify, you know, other things that are on board with that. 'cause as I'm reading, that seems to be at least the two biggest concerns that I see, is that, how, how would you go about dealing with those and are those two, two of the major concerns?

Well, if you're talking about trying to deal with dosing on this, it, it's, let's, it's, it's a nutritional product. It's labeled as a nutritional product. It's not a, it's not labeled as a pharmaceutical. And so the only way that you could talk about dosing and everything else is set up a whole regulatory process like we do with medical cannabis. Yeah, I don't think you want to go there. And now if you, the an op you mentioned an option of being sold somewhere besides, uh, you know, either in a gas station, a convenience store, or a vape shop. You could choose somewhere. You could choose a retail pharmacy, uh, and then just require them to put it behind the counter. I will tell you, I don't wanna sell it. I own three pharmacies and I don't wanna sell it. But maybe there are pharmacies out there that would want to, but

I mean, I've gotta show what driver's license to get pseudo fed, you know? I mean, it's like, this seems to be yes, you do, you know, as problematic as you know. Yeah.

So Those are, Are options that are still kind of on the table. This is still kind of a, a moving target, but, uh, I think we're, we're centering in on where we want to be. Um, I'm just, like I say, I just, I just wanted to let you know that the, the structure, we, and actually we've done this similar structure with hemp, hemp products, you know, that we are trying to, to regulate in the state of Utah. And, uh, these are things, and we're, we're really out in front of the rest of the country on that kind of stuff. And so we're trying to do, be very thoughtful and, and, uh, make sure that we are, we're taking care of the public so that one way or the other, the products they, they're, they're getting can be safe to them Right now. There are products out there that are causing real, real harm and we need to move those off.

Hi, my name is Melody Wolf and I'm from Kalamazoo, Michigan. I am here to oppose this current bill as well as the ban bill 'cause there's been a lot of discussion about that. I testified at the HHS and the FDA, uh, briefing on raum. They asked me to talk about the benefits of raum because I'm a 12 year daily consumer. I would really encourage you to follow the FDA and the trajectory on this. Um, one of my major concerns about the current bill is that it will be removing access for adults that responsibly lie on them. People may not be able to legally possess these products, even for years. The policy, um, the major concern is a second possession offense would be treated as a felony. This is an extreme harsh penalty for those who are otherwise law abiding citizens. And it could have serious long-term consequences. Please follow the HHS trajectory on keeping Freedom Legal.

Okay. I am the chairman of the, uh, American CRE Association. Uh, I was a state senator in Arizona for four years and a US congressman from Arizona for 10 years. Um, I sat on the science committee, um, and I learned very, very clearly that, uh, when trying to make public policy, you need to follow the science. There've been over a hundred peer review studies done. In fact, the FDA themselves did a dosing study to test the tolerance of cred. And they found in their dosing study that freedom was tolerated at all levels. That it doesn't pose a threat. You can't overdose on cre. In fact, the worst thing that happened was two people at excessive levels, uh, got nauseous. So what this bill is doing is conflating, uh, the 7 0 8, which we support a ban on. It's seven, uh, 7 0 8 is incredibly dangerous. And we do support it being scheduled, uh, and off the market. It's, in fact, that's why you've seen in Utah, those numbers skyrocket. But to throw the baby out with the bath water, uh, and conflating pratum, uh, extracts with a drug that's been synthesized and made 10 times the, the level of, uh, morphine is not good policy. And I would ask the committee to follow the science.

Great. Thanks for the opportunity. My name is Sheldon Bradshaw. I'm an FDA regulatory attorney for Botanicals for Better Health and Wellness. I'm the former Chief Counsel of the United States Food and Drug Administration, and the former Deputy Attorney, assistant Attorney General at the US Department of Justice. Um, we fully support Sheldon. Where, where are you coming from? Uh, Alexandria, Virginia. Thank You. Uh, we fully support the regulation of Kratom in a ban on 7 0 8, but we oppose HB three 80 seven's effort to criminalize kratom extracts, uh, and combination products. The problem with the extract languages, uh, Dr. Forsyth acknowledged is it, it treats full spectrum extracts that have the exact same alkaloid composition as botanical the actual leaf with concentrates, isolates, and synthetics. And that's a mistake. Uh, lots of cran legitimate cranium products in the marketplace are made from extracts that are full spectrum. They mirror the alkaloid content and composition of the leaf and should not be banned. And as Dr. Forsyth said, is not an issue that they're concerned with. Well, if the state is not concerned with that, the definition of extracts should be modified to make clear that it doesn't, uh, apply to extracts that mimic, uh, the CRE leaf and, uh, show great value. And again, I would echo the, uh, uh, the previous comment that you should follow the FDA's lead here. The FDA a likes Kratom, it's studies, Kratom and has found

Hi, you guys can see me. Hi, I'm Brandon McLaren. I'm out of Arizona. I represent DBZ Enterprises. We own and operate Encrypt Krato in your guys' estate. Uh, in retail, we sell over $10 million a year. We have a lot of safety studies that has proven that our product is safe. We've submitted our safety studies to the FDA in 2018 and 19 through our co-packer and our manufacturer. Um, we've been selling for a long time, and we've proven through all our studies, through serving sizes, uh, that it's safe. And the FDA now says they've had a public hearing and told everybody that they're not after natural kratom. And it's extract form. They're after, uh, seven oh h and that's it.

Hi, can you guys hear me? We can hear you. Thank you. My name is Misty Brown and I am in Colorado. I represent myself as well as thousands of people that follow me on social media. I advocate alongside the American Creative Association. Um, KRA saved my life from active addict, active addict for 11 years straight from 2008 to 2019. I was addicted to FDA approved pain pills, benzos, and muscle relaxers. In 2019, I walked into a smoke shop and I bought Holy Leaf Kram. It was behind the counter. It was locked up. I had to show my ID to get it. Colorado has an amazing Kram Consumer Protection Act here. Um, I agree with like 95% of her bill. Um, I, I believe that extracts, you know, full spectrum extract should be allowed to be sold because that could be somebody's lifeline. You know, somebody who's trapped in a living just walk in and go in and start their journey with kra, having no idea that it's gonna be their pathway to recovery. Um, band seven oh h I've never publicly said this, but I'm saying this today because of everything happening in Utah. Seven. Oh, gotta go. Okay. Thank you for allowing time to speak.

My name's Steven Hill. I'm from Lindon, Utah. I'm a massage therapist and, uh, certified in, uh, natural product Manufacturing. Um, I'm in opposition to the bill. I cri and saved my life. I've been, I was in active addiction for 10 years. Um, I went through rehabs, um, jails, everything. Um, I tried doing Suboxone and none of that worked for me. Krem. Yeah. Saved my life. Um, I also have my, my step, uh, stepmom who has cancer. She's been using Krem. Um, and my dad, I mean, I know so many people. It's not, I, I think we should be viewing Kratom as a solution instead of a, a problem, um, a, a solution to the opioid epidemic. Um, I believe it's safe. It doesn't activate the, the, the arrest in, uh, respiratory depression like opioids do. Um, and yeah, I think extracts are, I mean, I've worked in, um, health food stores. There's plenty of products that are sold in plant material and in extract four, it's really just taking out the, the FIS components of the, the plant. Um, I personally can't do the, the wheat Holy powder gives me bad stomach ache. So I appreciate having those. Um, but I guess I'm probably out of time. Okay.

Hi, good afternoon. My name's Jessica Gerding. I'm out of Tampa, Florida. I'm a US-based dietary supplement manufacturer operating under FDA good manufacturing practices. I've been making Creon products as a contract manufacturer for over a decade, and we passed every FDA audit during that time. We've also, uh, invested heavily into studying Kratom and Kre extracts, not 7 0 8. I wanna be very clear that those, that's something completely different. Um, and we take safety and compliance very seriously. Some of our customers have products that are made with us that are in the state of Utah. Um, we have valid new dietary ingredient notification for cranham powder. And we've also submitted our safety data for cranium extract. That includes clear serving sizes and daily intake re recommendations. Our extracts are made in the USA, they're clean, they're made under GMP conditions and our submissions follow FDA regulatory requirements. I don't know if that's on time there.

Hello. Can you hear and see me? Yes. How you doing? Um, I just, my name is Christopher. I am from New Jersey. I just wanna reiterate a couple things that a few of the people have already said. I've been using Plain Leaf creto and Creto extract since 2015. Um, it has given me a better quality of life. I was hit by a card eight years old and actually prescribed opiates for 15 years for pain. That's was the protocol back in the eighties and nineties. And I stopped using 'em just 'cause I wanted a different life. And, you know, I started using Aleve that worked great. Then I had a heart attack. So I've had a lot of health problem, natural leaf, atu and products have given me a better quality of life, and hundreds of people I know have a better quality of life 'cause of craving. So, it's about it.

Got it. Yep, you're here. Good afternoon, chairman and members of the committee. Shannon, my name is Shannon. Where, where are you coming from? I live in Massachusetts. Okay. Thank you. Go ahead. All right. My name is Shannon and I'm testifying here today because I have a good friend who lives in Utah. She also depends on natural holy leaf kratom to work and function like I and a lot of us do. It is absolutely terrifying to know people like me and many others will suffer in pain if natural Holy Leaf Kratom is banned. It doesn't just affect Utah, but my state of Massachusetts in the whole country as a whole, the chronic, my, the chronic lower back pain I have experienced before I found natural Holy Pratum. I cannot begin to explain to you what I went through. I am a healthcare worker, and I can't imagine trying to work in total agony, take care of those who depend on me daily. Actually, our neighbor, Rhode Island, banned CRE in 2017. They did this scientific research and they reversed the ban on cred as of April 1st, 2026. Also, the FDA announced in their July 29th, 2025 press conference that they are not interested in scheduling cred. They only want to ban seven oh h and I support the ban on seven oh h. Thank you

Okay. Excellent. Yeah, I want to, uh, just draw a statement. I do oppose the ban. I, uh, became a, uh, user of Kratom purely by accident. I was an alcoholic after the pandemic happened. Drank a lot. Uh, decided to try Kratom just kind of as an alternative. And they completely eliminated my wanting for alcohol. I'm now alcohol free. I've actually gotten off crem as well. Uh, they do say it's addictive if I found that be to be about as addictive as caffeine coffee. But, uh, it completely changed my life. And, uh, yeah, I'm, I'm rather boring 'cause I don't drink anymore, you know? But that's a different lifestyle and it's really been helpful for me. Thank you. Uh, thank you. Chad, where did you tell us where you're coming from? Oh, I'm sorry. Yeah. I'm Sugar House, Salt Lake City.

I move that we favorably recommend HB 3 87. Create a modifications.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I'd like to speak briefly. Um, I'm really confused with, we may be putting the cart before the horse and really understanding danger even of pure leaf kratom. But the fact that the sponsor has, uh, basically the expiration clause in the bill, that if we do have a ban or if it's ever put as illegal, then the bill is of no force. So in the meantime, we would have regulation of sellers with penalties. If it's banned, then it's banned and this goes away. So I think, uh, on that basis, I'll support the bill.

Can I speak to why I'm making this motion? Probably turn my mic back on. All right. Thank you.

Order, Mr. Chairman? Yes, go ahead. Uh, A motion should have an opportunity to speak.

Thank you, Mr. Vice Chair. The reason why I would like to see this bill move through committee is this bill does not ban Kratom. It is a proactive way to make sure that sure, that in the event that our body decides to move and ban Kratom, uh, or, or rather not ban crem, we are proactively making sure we have regulatory oversight. If Krem still exists in the States, I think this is a responsible approach. I think this is needed given the testimonies that we have heard on both sides. People who have benefited from Kre, people who have not. This is the way that we should be looking at Kratom if we decide to keep it. We need this oversight. We need to create this scaffolding to ensure that people are not hurt. We do keep it here in our states. So this is why I would Favorly move that we move this bill out the committee. Thank you.

Thank you. We've been at this for a long time, so I will be brief. I couldn't agree more. I am, I've, we've worked really, really hard to thread a careful needle, recognizing that regardless of other decisions about banning or keeping it legal. What we do not have, and we absolutely need, is a regulatory framework. We need to give our regulating agencies the ability to have the teeth in the law to regulate a product that yes, provides benefit for some people, but it has been catastrophically dangerous, deadly to over 200 Utahans. I don't want that number to get any bigger. And so I think that regardless of what we decide in the, in the macroeconomic sense or in the macro sense, we have a regulatory vacuum right now. And this is the, this has been a way that I've tried to craft carefully regulation because regardless of how the full conversation goes, we, we can't leave that vacuum in place for another year. Thank you. And I'd really appreciate support of the motion.

I'll waive. Okay. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, committee. I am grateful that you are sticking it out on this late hour. We're on a Monday night. Um, I will be as brief as I possibly can. I'm also joined by Dr. Brandon Forsyth from Department of Ag of Agriculture and Food. So you may have heard a little bit about Kratom this year. Um, this bill is the result of a lot of work that went into interim session and study with regard to the availability of Kratom in the state of Utah. You may remember that we had legislation last year that sought to give the Department of Agriculture and Food more statutory authorization to regulate our, the Raum products that were available in the state of Utah. Unfortunately, that Bill failed at the end of session. Um, and so our Department of Agriculture and food was left without many tools, um, to regulate this product that is increasingly known to be dangerous, particularly as, um, a broader variety and a more diverse set of products become increasingly available, largely due to things like extracts and compounded products, um, which are a dramatic deviation from the Pure Leaf Creto products that were broadly under that were available when the, um, the Crem Protection Act was originally passed in 2019, uh, the industry has changed a lot. It's now a multi-billion dollar industry. Um, it is wreaking havoc in our communities. That said, there is a, there is a basic understanding even at the FDA, that there is reliably a reliable argument that Pure Leaf Kratom, um, has some benefit and minimal risk. And so this bill, that is why this bill does allow for that legal, um, avenue for Kratom to be available in the state of Utah. Um, I wanna point out that, you know, over the interim, since we did not give UDAF, the ability to, um, to, we did not give you have clear ability to better regulate the, um, the Kratom space. They did attempt to put some rulemaking around KRA products in the state of Utah. Um, and in response after killing the bill, that would've given them statutory better clarity and statute. Um, the creative industry sued the state for $8.2 million. And so this is definitely an industry that is hostile to being regulated. And this bill creates, it replaces what is now a vacuum of regulation. It provides a regulatory F framework so that we have clarity so that people know if they are purchasing raum products in the state of Utah, that it is regulated, that is watched and monitored by Department of Agriculture and Food, um, that the products that are being sold are registered and tested. Um, oftentimes C K*m products we know have labeling that don't, does not accurately represent what is in the product and are regularly sold, um, not as dangerous substances, but energy drinks and enhancement opportunities. And, um, increasingly unfortunately, people are becoming addicted and even dying due to, um, Cranham products. And this is not just 7 0 8 products as, as will be, um, probably argued, um, in the coming discussion. Uh, so I just wanna reiterate this is, you know, the a a lot of many months of work and, um, careful consideration about the best way to move forward in the state, to make sure that what is available is legal, is monitored, is safe, and that we are not exposing adults or children to significant additional risks that, um, we're seeing with regard to access ready access to a wide variety of CRE products in the state of Utah. With that, I'd like to give, uh, Dr. Forsyth just a few minutes and we're happy to open it to questions.

Hello, I'm Dr. Brandon Forsyth, director of the Specialized Products Division at the Utah Department of Agriculture and Food. I'm grateful to the sponsor for bringing this bill forward. It has been an increasingly difficult space to regulate in the past few years. The products that we're seeing at gas stations, at smoke shops and even specialized shops in the mall are clearly targeted towards, um, getting people addicted. They're used as supplements, they're used as pain relief and much more beyond just what the industry will claim, which is to get people off of other drugs. They're clearly trying to acquire new customers, get them addicted, and milk them for their money. We see people spending tens of thousands of dollars on these products, and it shows a clear pattern of buying a couple at first and then ramping that purchasing habit up to the point where they're, um, spending significant amounts of money and it's doing real harm to them at the same time. So we just urge you to pass out this bill, get these products out of our corner stores so that we can protect our public. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. That completes our presentation.

I have a couple actually. So I, this, the whole current discussion has been a moving target. It still is, by the way. And even as this morning had some discussions, just a couple of points, because your bill is primarily a regulatory piece, you know, and putting together, uh, in the bill, you have a, a definition of the CRE product that could be sold. I, I'm not sure that that's going to change, but the, there, there is potential movement on the processor. Uh, you know, whether, you know, if a processor can, uh, can still maintain a certain product for a period of time, maybe with a delayed implementation on that. And, uh, I just curious if, have you thought about, you know, because there's a companion bill out there, if those definitions seem to start changing, do we, what will we do just to have a coordinating clause or

Y Yes, thank you Mr. Chair. I was actually just visiting with, um, Mr. Williams, who's the drafting attorney, um, on the bill. And he's watching the, the, the other bill senate bill going, uh, the other direction across to the house. Um, and he is working on making sure that there is a coordinating clause. And I think that, you know, if there are concessions made to make sure that we are creating a soft Blanding as possible, that is, um, absolutely reasonable. It was an something that ever came up when we were talking about the crafting of this bill, but that's the beauty of the process and, you know, people bringing different viewpoints and scenarios that weren't necessarily imagined, but certainly need to be accounted for.

Yeah. And the other point would be that in currently in that bill that's going the other direction, it specifically says only they can only be sold in tobacco specialty shops. Correct. So as we look at this bill and you talk about, uh, creative retailer, we have to keep in mind that if that goes through, that would be the only potential retail physician. Is that right?

Correct. And the other complication isn't, well not complication, but the other factor that plays into that is I have nicotine specialty products, bill, I can't remember. That's also coming through, um, the Senate that passed Health, health and Human Services, I think. Yeah. Um, that also specifically says that creative products would be sold in specialty stores.

Point out basically the same thing that you just did and just trying to look at a couple of the differences, similarities, the two bills. The other thing would be the, I'm not gonna try to pronounce the term What's Reine? Yeah. Whatever. Hydroxy mettre Hydroxy. Yep. Seven hydroxy 7 0 8 is a, is a great acronym As well. Seven. Oh, I'll do that from now on. Um, 2% alkaloid versus 0.4%. I think his is shows 0.4%. Yours is 2%.

I don't, I don't know. I don't even know what that means. I'm gonna lean on the good Doctor Forsyth for that one, if that's okay. Which One is there one better? Do we roll the dice? But Yeah,

Can you rephrase the question? I'm not really sure

What's the difference between HB 3 87 at 2% of alkaloid fraction. Okay. And SB 45 allows only 4.4% pure leaf raum. That's how the Vernon words are used. So I don't even know Yeah. What that means. So

it is just an amount of the seven hydroxy that could be present in the product. The leaf tends to have not very much seven hydroxy Alpine in it in the first place. So it's not as much of a concern if you're down to just leaf

Either one of those. We're gonna wanna coordinate on that too, with the lowest amount.

Yes, that would would be okay. Yeah. Alright.

At least I think that's what we wouldn't, we, Dr. Forsyth, you know, if we want to coordinate those two points so

We Yeah, that's correct. We would want the lower, dunno which return It was.

So I think it addresses what's naturally present in Pure Leaf, and that's a very, very low percentage of seven hydroxy matine. Um, and so that it is naturally founded, so we can't completely outlaw it altogether and then simultaneously keep pure leaf crem available. Um, 2% versus 0.4%. I think the 0.4% is what's naturally available. And mine just allowed a little wiggle room for that so that we weren't arbitrarily pulling some products off the shelf if they tested, if they naturally tested a little bit higher,

As in my mind, we, we need to stick with whatever the lowest is. So It'll work for either one. Yeah. And there again, the coordinating clause, this is the piece that puts the regulat regulation in place.

Thank you. So, uh, house Bill 3 87 and Senate Bill 40 45, how do they work together? Where's the overlap and where do they conflict?

Can I ask Chris to come up? I haven't actually kept track of what is in that detailed of a, that close of Yeah. Senator of Senator ml's, Bill, Senator ml's. Bill does outlaw, you know, it takes, you know, the seven hydroxy and puts it into a schedule one. It, it would, it's more silent and on the regulatory piece, but Chris can fill in those Gaps. So, and I'll just add one more thing before I hand it over to Chris. Originally, Senator ML'S bill, um, created a full ban, uh, completely so that all products would be completely illegal in the state of Utah. I crafted this bill because of what I, what I presented that we are, we have a regulatory vacuum. And I wanted to recognize that if the ban did not pass, um, then we would have no, we would be stuck right back where we were. We would have no regulation. UAF would have no statutory authority to regulate the space, or if Senator Bill, Senator ML'S ban did pass, and for example, the governor vetoed it or something that's more out of our control. If the federal government passed legislation that preempted our ability to outlaw kratom, we wanted to make sure that there was a regulatory framework in place that would kick in automatically if any Kratom was legal in state, or if a ban on it was not an option or not available or did not, was not passed by this body. And so that's why at the end there's, you know, there's a, um, a framework that just basically says this is silent and unless create is legal. And then I'll pass it over to Chris to help phone a friend.

Um, thank you Chris Williams, uh, office of Legislative Research and General Counsel. Um, and just to be clear, uh, not here to advocate on behalf of any of the several cred bills that have been discussed at the legislature this year. Um, so I think that history is helpful for that Representative Daley Provo laid out. So we had, uh, SB 48, which was Senator Vickers. Bill initially started as banning, um, pseudo and doxyl and our scheduling pseudo and doxyl and, uh, seven hydroxy matine. Then you had, um, Senator ML'S bill that was banning all of any alkaloid found in the Creon plant. And then you had, um, Representative Dailey-Provost, um, kind of, uh, fail safe regulatory scheme. Uh, the bill that ended up the Senator Mcal ended up moving outta the Senate was an amalgam of Senator Vickers bill and Representative Daley Provost's Bill. So it has a lot of the regulatory piece, representative Daley provost's Bill currently doesn't have, doesn't address pseudo and doxyl or, uh, seven hydroxy reine. Um, and so we would need to coordinate, um, there's some language that's different. Uh, we don't use pure leaf raum as there's several technical issues that I would have to coordinate between the two bills. Um, but they do do similar things in their current state.

Thank you. Does that help? Okay. Yeah, No, Don't go far. What, what I'm, what I'm trying to figure out in, in this is, I mean, we've got different bills. Senator Vickers has his proposals on taxation regulation. That component then Senator Mikel has his pieces and now your pieces layered in there. And, uh, I think I'm, what I'm trying to figure out is, okay, let's assume they all pass and I'm a manufacturer. What, what now, you know,

Did not all of those, oh, if I may Yeah, go Ahead Chris. Yeah. Not all of those bills in their present state can pass as they are. I'm gonna have to coordinate several of them. Um, several of Senator ML'S pieces supersede or swallow what's in this current bill, if that bill were to pass. So yes, there would have to be coordination, uh, coordination clause, and then we'll have to make decisions as to, uh, you all will have to make decisions as to which sections override the others. The

Idea is to try to keep them, at least in my mind, keep them moving so that we can make those decisions. 'cause there's still a little bit of discussion. Like, like I said, I was in some meetings on the house side this morning trying to figure out the exact policy. Then we can come back and it may end up being we incorporate all of it into one piece. So

Yeah, that's what I was gonna say. My preference would be if I was a manufacturer or, you know, yeah. Somebody else trying to follow the law. Having this in one location is much better than having, you know, three different, you know, directions to try and figure out what to do.

Yeah. Um, anyway, Unfortunately at this point, the final decision on the exact policy is still a little bit in limbo. Yeah. Not, not a lot, but just, there's just a couple of pieces in there's trying to come together on.

Yeah. Okay. Well, I guess, uh, you know, okay, so that being said, let, let me ask this, you know, one piece that I was somewhat concerned about, um, with the, you know, crate retailer and, and that kind of stuff. Now it seems like we're, for a while it felt like we were not super excited about vape and smoke shops, that kinda stuff being the purveyor, and now we're saying this is the right seller of the help me.

That decision was actually in Senator ml's bill. Not this one, but

Yeah. Okay.

Um, so one of the things that I did mention, uh, a minute ago was my specialized product sales amendments, um, which is HB 3 85. Um, that does also create tight regulation around the smoke shops themselves. And so they are, in order to, to make sure we get this right, um, in my view, they both do need to pass. And it's been all part of a broader discussion as those have moved through committee. Um, and that bill passed Senate committee unanimously on Friday.

Okay. Boy, what a party. A Lot of moving pieces. And I it, like you said earlier,

There's still a lot of time. Yeah, still plenty of time. It

Has still plenty of time. It may feel, feel like it's senator, but this has been, we have tried to be really, really thoughtful. It's, it is very, very complex. Um, there are a lot of strong opinions in this space, but, um, in my view, most sly, a lot of lawmakers who care very deeply about getting this right.

Yeah. Okay. So I think if I like ML'S bill, I don't like this bill.

No, That's not right.

But I like you is what I understand.

Right. Better than Senator ml. Um, I don't think that the two bills necessarily, um, detract from one another. I think that, um, as, as you'll notice, um, this bill is still in its original form that passed the House of Representatives, um, hasn't been substituted passed the, you know, house business and Labor unanimously, um, passed the House of Representatives with strong, um, support. And I think that given that Senator ML'S bill started a with a lot more absolute, it was really just a, a ban and that there's been a lot of discussion and, and, um, compromise. And that's the beauty of the process. And I do appreciate that. Um, my hope was that when this bill came over to the Senate, we wouldn't need it. That Senator ML'S bill would, um, get through the house and we would have the regulation that we need, but politics don't work that way. And there's been a lot of pressure on, on the house side and on Senator ml to make some differences. And so that's why we're having this conversation this late in the game. You know, last committee meeting, last bill, last committee meeting. Um, before we move just to floor time, because I, we can't, like I said, if Senator ML'S bill gets caught up in the politics on the house side and this doesn't pass, and we are stuck with a regulatory vacuum and these products are remain just as dangerous and unregulated and the industry remains consistently poised to sue our state every single time we try to regulate it.

Alright, well thank you for muddying the waters. Just a little bit more.

My pleasure. You ought to be in the middle of this.

My name is Matt ac, I own a manufacturing company in Utah Valley, uh, in Linden. And I appreciate your time tonight listening to this and staying late. I'll be brief. Um, I support the regulation of, of C Credo. I am all for it. I've, I've read this bill in and out. I've been a part of the SB 45 as well in participating in those conversations where, where I'm having a hard time. And what I'd like your consideration in is exactly what you've stated tonight. And that is with the manufacturing side that deals with this. Roughly 40% of our revenue comes from the manufacturing of CRE products. Uh, we have done our best to stay within the regulations and the guidelines of the FDA We test regularly. Um, all of the product that we produce for a single company is sold out of the state of Utah. And the way that the bill is written currently today, sort of muddies the waters a little bit for a manufacturer versus the retail side of the law. And so it's my, my, um, my plead to you guys to be able to look at this bill and further define and pull out the manufacturing from the retail side of the bill. Thank

You. And to be fair, um, Senator ml's, bill does the same currently in its current state. I know there's some discussions going on, but in his current state it does the same thing. Next,

Ryan Del with Diversified Botanic Auto Draper. And thank you everybody for your, your time this evening and staying late. So there's been some statements made. We as an industry or us as a company, we care about getting this right. We've invested a 12 year lease into Draper one year in, we've invested $28 million in building out an NSF 4 55 dash two compliant facility that's also pharmaceutical grade. And if this passes and extracts become banned, we'll be forced to declare bankruptcy and move the company. As we look at it that we've been trying to help and trying to inform consistently the other side of the conversation to no avail. There's statements that are made that show a lack of complete understanding on Kratem as it sits. What I mean by that is to us the proper regulatory framework would be 400 parts per million of dry weight, which couldn't be gamified across the board that's been enacted in Florida since August of 25. And you'll see consistent declines in any sort of adverse effects there. There was a statement around an $8 million lawsuit from the industry. It was actually from one Independent com, one company from the industry, but not the industry as a whole. The Department of Agriculture requires us to register every product before we bring it to market. We showed them labeling, we show them testing, they have the ability to regulate and enforce this. I think what it's come down to is a lack of ability for funding to get the enforcement across the board, not the fact that it doesn't exist as a possibility. Thank you. I think I was there.

Mr. Chair Committee. My name is Guy Higgins. I am from Herriman and I'm representing myself as along with, uh, diversified Botanic. Um, coming into Thera Space, I was extremely uneducated and I believe that with the bills being passed here today, there's a lot of lack of education of what these specific accolades break down to be and what they mean and the use of them of overall. I'm a combat veteran. I served in OEF in 2010 and Kratom helps me. I have chronic pain, I have chronic depression and anxiety. These things are things that I have to get along with and deal with regularly. K*M is a supplement that I use responsibly and I definitely am not using or spending $10,000 on Kratom at any given time. These things, like anything else in our states, just alcohol, nicotine, everything needs to be regulated. We believe in the regulation and needs to go forward, but there needs to be more education on the subject before any bills are passed or voted yes on that are not truly understood. Thank you.

Yeah. Thank you Mr. Uh, Mr. Chair. I really do appreciate the motion. Um, I'm trying not to, to to sit here and, um, take it personally that there's an, there are allegations that there's just no understanding of this. I've, um, we've, we've done a lot of work and my understanding is that people are getting very sick, they're getting addicted and they're dying, um, due to products, uh, Creon products that aren't 7 0 8 that are extracts. And this bill, um, is not a ban. It does create regulations. Um, it is definitely misleading to say that these are carefully tested regulated products by FDA. I could point you to a number of studies and articles that describe the FDA as being, um, very unengaged in properly regulating this product. And so it really has been left to the states, which is why you're seeing this debate go on in states across the nation. And, um, I would be, um, very alarmed if our state missed out on the opportunity to make sure that we keep people safe. And so I would very much appreciate your support of the motion. Thank you.

Thank you. My summation, I would just say, remind everyone that seven hydroxy is a really dangerous product, uh, in concentrated form, which it can be concentrated through, uh, extracts and other means, but seven hydroxy is 20 times more potent than morphine. And we, that's something that is a science and we need to be, keep that in mind. Uh, also recognize that as we move forward, there's still kind of a moving target with where we exactly land. And it may be, some of these may be be consolidated, these ideas may be consolidated and the, but we need to keep moving as we moving it forward. So I'd rec urge you to move forward with that.

Yes. I, I realize this has some really bad things attached to it. I'm a little concerned that distribution of this product has winners and losers and I, I wish we could get a better handle on what we're gonna do with that, but with that I vote. Aye.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Um, house Bill 3 87, um, is in response to a broadly recognized issue in the state of Utah. And that is the reality that we have, um, some, an increasing rate and, um, risk of injury, addiction, and death associated with, um, some crem products. And so in working with stakeholders over the last several years, we have, um, come together as I hope a legislature to recognize that, um, Kratom needs to be regulated. That we in the state of Utah, unfortunately right now, have a regulatory vacuum, which means that our regulatory agency, department of Agriculture and food does not have enough leeway to make sure that we've got any products that are on the shelves and sold in the state of Utah are safe, are tested and regulated. And so this creates a regulatory framework, um, that goes into effect if the state does not pass a ban. I know that there is a lot of discussion about whether or not the state should ban Kratom. This bill does not do that, but it does make sure that regardless of what decision we make with regard to Kratom, that we've got regulatory framework. So in the state of Utah right now, we do have, um, a division of specialized products division at the Department of Agriculture and Food. This pulls the regulation of CRETO into that division and also renames the Cannabinoid Fund, the special products fund. And so the registration fees and taxes that are currently imposed on industrial hemp products CBD products in the state of Utah will be mirrored for legal hemp, or I'm sorry, for legal CRE products, which gives UAF the resources to make sure that the products that are sold in our stores are done so safely. Um, we just wanna make sure that as we tackle this challenging problem, that we have a unified regulatory framework that improves customer safety and ensures product compliance, um, and does this by provided, providing dedicated funding and enforcement, um, through the administrative agencies in the state. And with that, Mr. Speaker, I'm open to questions.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker with us sponsor yield to a question

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm looking at, um, the lines in starting at 69 under the Creto retailer, and, um, it, it includes, this looks like that this, this section here makes a change to creto extract versus, uh, the the raw plant matter. And I'm just wondering if you can help me understand what's the difference between the plant matter, the, the, the raw plant matter and the extract? What, like process wise or material wise?

Yeah, thank you, Mr. Speaker. So this is a recognition that a lot of patients, um, very much want to make sure that safe products are available. And so this, this bill, again, it only goes into effect if there's no ban, um, ensures that pure Creto Leaf products are available and also recognizes that currently the rate, the dramatic increases in addiction and overdose, um, are tend to be associated with synthetic products that are made in labs. Um, one of those is seven hydroxy. Now, I want to be clear, there is other legislation in the state of Utah that does schedule seven hydroxy, which is, um, seven, oh, also known as 7 0 8 or seven hydroxy. Matine is the full, um, chemical name of that. And so this bill does restrict product, Creon products that are defined by, excuse me, the Department of Agriculture and Food as Dangerous and Pot have potential for addiction and harm, including synthetics.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, colleagues. I just wanna, uh, maybe put some clarification around this as well. If you were to look at, for example, coffee or tea or caffeine, for example, these, this contains material that is also consider considered harmful. It is considered addictive. Um, yet generally we don't eat these materials raw. I mean, sometimes you brew them into a coffee or a tea, you get very low doses, but a lot of times caffeine is extracted and then it's inserted into things like drinks into sodas and energy drinks and other, um, um, products that we do consume. And I think that there's an understanding that we need to differentiate between the synthetic products that exist in, in these, uh, extremely low numbers and amounts in the plant leaf matter itself. And that there are those that are seeking to extract that and synthesize it at a very high dosage, which would be lethal in almost any circumstance of any type of material or any product that's out there that we consume. And, uh, as they say, the dosage makes the poison and the, the natural process of just taking a leaf and whether or not you're going to, uh, basically crush it and, and then consume it in that form, or if you're gonna extract the, the materials from it and put it into another form for consumption versus that taking that concept and going from the synthetic stuff, that is actually very dangerous. But I wanna make sure that we're understanding the differences between these. I think that whether a ban goes into effect or not, this will have a significant influence on the industry that we currently have in Utah that is selling the raw leaf products, whether it's natural or whether they have derived from extract, but not differentiating that, um, from the synthetic products, which are the bigger danger here that I agree should be banned. And I think there's additional legislation in that, uh, effect. So I, I'm just, I'm concerned about the language of this bill, putting them all together in one group and, and hoping that the body understands the difference between these. Thanks.

You Mr. Speaker with

Could the good sponsor speak to how this legislation compares with other legislation coming from the Senate, from our colleague from Cedar City, and also our colleague from Spanish Fork? What happens if, if those pass and what happens if they don't pass? Could you provide that, uh, comparison?

Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker. So our colleague from Cedar City has got legislation that provides the, um, the, the registration fees and allows for the Department of Agriculture and Food to establish those registration fees and collect the revenue regard. And it also goes into effect only if the ban bill doesn't pass. We have a colleague from Spanish Fork who has legislation that seeks to ban creto outright, completely make it illegal in the state of Utah in all forms. This bill could be passed in conjunction with both of those, but would only go into effect if the, if a ban did not pass or if it was for example, vetoed or if we did pass it, but it was per maybe preempted by federal law if the federal government passed a, a restriction on banning or something like that. So this would go on the books. It only has a trigger if the ban does not exist.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. So would it be fair to say that you're putting additional restrictions on maybe not as far as some of these other bills, but if they are, if they don't pass, this still increases the restrictions on cred sales?

Correct. Mr. Speaker? This creates a regulatory framework which does not exist in the state of Utah and would not exist under the ban bill. And so what I, what I know what I, I can't tell you with certainty. I, I have my beliefs on what CRE products can reasonably be available and deemed as safe and, and what is not. The science is out on that. I think that it is prudent to err on the side of caution with regard to Kratom because, um, deaths have skyrocketed in the state of Utah. But, um, given that the debate on what exactly should be illegal is still under issue, what we are lacking is a regulatory framework. It is a vacuum right now without this bill, regardless of the legality, we have given our regulatory agencies no tools to regulate Kratom, and that is, we, we cannot allow that to, to proceed going forward.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm, I'm in support of this.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker with a sponsor yield to a question.

Peck. Okay, thank you. I really like the direction that this is going, and I'm pretty supportive of it. Oops. But I do, um, have a question, which is that, um, I, so I happen to know that Kratom is being sold on digital as well as in physical locations, and it's even being sold to our children within their school databases. So in this section, uh, where it's lines 1 0 9 to one or 1 0 8 to one 10, I love that part about the fee that's there. And I'm wondering, and the registration and how the Raum sellers have to register. For the record, I'm just wanting to know, would people selling online within the state of Utah, and especially if they're selling to children in the state of Utah, also have to register and be subject to that? Fine.

Uh, thank you Mr. Speaker for the question. Um, as it stands, I do not believe the online sales are restricted in the state of Utah. I would support a restriction to that, even recognizing how hard it is to enforce that. But yes, um, technically under this bill, any product that's sold in the state of Utah, either online or in person, would be subject to the fine.

Okay. Thank you. And I would just support even going forward, forward with this, if it is sold to children, that there's definitely a higher penalty, penalty of some sort, an increased penalty, bigger teeth, and I just really appreciate the direction that this is going. Thank you.

Thank Mr. Speaker. I rise in support of this bill. I struggled in committee and, and had a lot of questions for the good sponsor, but when you look at where we are right now, we have very little control, very little regulation, very few penalties for those that are selling Raum as a, a, a health product from gasoline stores, from from specialty stores, and we have very little control. This is a, a good bill that moves us in that direction. Again, if there's a ban, if there's more stringent regulation, this bill doesn't go into effect. I think it's a great step for us to take this step now and, and keep moving forward. Applaud the good sponsor. Encourage your body support.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I also rise in support of this bill. I wanna thank the good representative for her work in this area. We're seeing a lot more, um, issues with this product. Um, not only deaths but addiction problems that are happening in the state. And I think it's, it's a good time. We address that and this bill really moves the needle on that and I would encourage the body's support. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'd like to stand in support of this bill as well. The good sponsors worked really, really hard on this to find a balance, and I think a lot of things that need to be addressed have been spoken about. In addition to the, the, uh, guardrails that this puts in place. Uh, we also have two issues. We have a lot of people who, uh, really benefit from the plant side of Crate and, uh, I think that's very, very clear. And, uh, then we have a problem over here that there's this, uh, chemical based product that's being sold in different stores and retailers around the state that are quite dangerous. And, uh, I think this bill finds a balance between the two and differentiates the two. And it also points out some of the areas where we need to work. We need better regulation, we need enforcement for kind of the bad side. That's not happening today. So I do stand in support of this bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank, thank you Mr. Speaker. And I really, really appreciate the robust discussion. Two, uh, comments that were made earlier. There is no question that the product of, um, of CRE product span a a broad spectrum. Um, the problem is, it's really, really difficult to, to get at in statute, I would say it would be we would be not doing our jobs well if we tried to get really specific in statute about exactly where on that spectrum we need to allow for synthetics or extractions. Um, because this is an industry that increasingly is finding every loophole. And I want to be very respectful of the fact that there are people who find relief for serious medical problems with cred. I don't discount that at all, but I also know that over 200 people in the state of Utah have died over the last couple of years. And thousands, untold thousands are addicted. And where we, where we land on that spectrum with regard to what is considered safe or unsafe is not something that should be determined in statute. Instead, we should be giving this to our professionals whose jobs are to monitor and regulate and to do the testing and the safety assessments so that those decisions can be made in a careful scientific way, not based on the, the arguments that are made by an industry that makes a profit off of addicting people to some of these dangerous sub sub substances. So I, I tried really hard to work with stakeholders to thread that needle as best I could to make sure that we leave open the door for products that are broadly understood to be safe, but to make sure that we have a Vernal, we have very, very clear restrictions and regulatory framework for everything else so that we can keep people safe and keep dangerous products off the shelves. I would sincerely appreciate the body support. Thank you.