THE DEA’S 8-FACTOR ANALYSIS:
What the Government Already Knows About Kratom — And Why a Federal Ban Is Overdue**
By Wendy Chamberlain, Kratom Danger Awareness, Inc.
Introduction
The DEA’s 8-Factor Analysis is the legally required scientific framework used to determine whether a substance should be controlled under the Controlled Substances Act¹. When the DEA completed this analysis for kratom’s primary alkaloids—mitragynine and 7-hydroxymitragynine (7-OH)—it concluded that these substances produce opioid-like effects, have abuse potential, pose significant public-health risks, and have been identified in deaths, including cases where mitragynine toxicity was listed as the cause².
Despite these findings, kratom remains legal and widely available across much of the United States.
What Is the DEA’s 8-Factor Analysis?
Federal law requires the DEA to evaluate substances using eight criteria, including abuse potential, pharmacology, public-health risk, dependence liability, and whether the substance can be converted into more dangerous drugs¹. These factors are not optional and are meant to protect public safety—not industry interests.
Opioid-Like Effects and Abuse Potential
The DEA determined that kratom’s alkaloids act on the same opioid receptors as morphine and other controlled opioids².
“Mitragynine and 7-hydroxymitragynine bind to opioid receptors and produce opioid-like effects.”²
Independent pharmacological research confirms this finding, demonstrating μ-opioid receptor agonism and reinforcing the DEA’s conclusions³⁴.
The DEA further noted:
“7-hydroxymitragynine is several times more potent than morphine.”²
This potency finding has also been established in peer-reviewed research⁵.
Lack of Scientific Control and Product Manipulation
The DEA and FDA both emphasized that kratom products sold in the U.S. are chemically inconsistent, unregulated, and often manipulated to increase alkaloid concentration²⁶. This variability makes safe dosing impossible and prevents meaningful consumer protection.
Patterns of Abuse and Escalating Use
The DEA documented nationwide patterns consistent with drugs of abuse, including daily heavy use, escalating doses, and withdrawal-avoidance behavior².
“The current pattern of kratom use shows characteristics consistent with drugs of abuse.”²
Poison-center surveillance and emergency department data corroborate these findings, showing a steady rise in serious kratom-related adverse events⁷⁸.
Public-Health Risks and Confirmed Deaths
Contrary to claims that kratom does not cause fatalities, the DEA explicitly stated:
“Mitragynine toxicity has been identified as a cause of death.”²
The CDC has documented kratom-positive and mitragynine-positive deaths through national mortality surveillance systems, including cases without traditional opioids⁹¹⁰.
The FDA has repeatedly warned the public that kratom has opioid-like properties, addiction risk, and no approved medical use¹¹¹².
Dependence and Withdrawal
Clinical literature and the DEA both describe kratom withdrawal as opioid-like and clinically significant, particularly in heavy or long-term users²¹³¹⁴. Reported symptoms include severe gastrointestinal distress, sweating, cravings, mood disturbances, and functional impairment.
Precursor Risk and Synthetic Derivatives
The DEA warned that mitragynine can be chemically altered into more potent opioid compounds². Since that warning, synthetic kratom derivatives—including mitragynine pseudoindoxyl and high-potency 7-OH products—have entered U.S. markets¹⁵.
Why Federal Action Did Not Follow
In 2016, the DEA announced its intent to temporarily schedule kratom’s alkaloids under Schedule I¹⁶. Following coordinated political and industry pressure, the agency withdrew the action—despite no new science contradicting the original 8-Factor Analysis.
Since then, kratom products have grown more potent, more accessible, and more dangerous.
Policy Implications
The DEA concluded that kratom meets the criteria for control under the Controlled Substances Act². This supports a federal ban, rather than fragmented state-by-state regulation, to prevent further deaths, protect minors, and stop the proliferation of synthetic analogues.
Joseph S. Lumbrazo: Why This Matters
My son, Joseph S. Lumbrazo, died on August 30, 2020, in Oneida, New York. His toxicology report listed mitragynine toxicity as the cause of death, with no fentanyl, heroin, or illicit opioids present.
Joseph used kratom for energy, believing it to be a safe, legal supplement. His death reflects exactly what the DEA warned about in its 8-Factor Analysis years earlier.
This advocacy—and the push for the Joseph S. Lumbrazo Federal Kratom Ban Act—exists so other families do not learn the truth the way we did.
Sources & References
¹ Controlled Substances Act, 21 U.S.C. § 811
² DEA, Denial of Petition to Initiate Proceedings to Reschedule Kratom, Federal Register, Aug. 22, 2018
³ Kruegel AC, Grundmann O. J Med Chem. 2018
⁴ Váradi A et al. J Med Chem. 2016
⁵ Takayama H et al. J Nat Prod. 2002
⁶ FDA, “FDA and Kratom” (official statements)
⁷ Post S et al. Clinical Toxicology. 2019
⁸ CDC, Poison Control & MMWR reports
⁹ CDC, SUDORS/NVDRS mortality surveillance
¹⁰ Olsen EO et al., MMWR. 2019
¹¹ FDA, Gottlieb Statement on Kratom (2018)
¹² FDA, Import Alert 54-15
¹³ Singh D et al. Drug and Alcohol Dependence. 2014
¹⁴ Galbis-Reig D. Wisconsin Medical Journal. 2016
¹⁵ Recent toxicology literature on mitragynine pseudoindoxyl
¹⁶ DEA, Notice of Intent to Schedule Kratom (2016)