Docela zajímavé je pročíst si zkušenosti lidí na redditu, kteří se tím rozhodli řešit ADHD. Někdo tam psal, že to bere šest let 2.5g denně. Sem tam vysadí aby se ujistil jak na tom je a žádné problémy. Z toho mě vyplývá:
- lze si udržet nízkou dávku, stačí se chovat dospěle s rozumem.
- při nízkém dávkování není absťák a nebo je minimální a to i po 6 ti letech užívání.
Dovolím si dvě citace z toho medicínského článku:
Kratom tolerance, dependence, and withdrawal have been reported with daily and heavy use, though these symptoms are generally milder and of shorter duration than those of classical opioids (Ahmad and Aziz, 2012; Singh et al., 2014; Singh et al., 2015; Swogger et al., 2015; Grundmann, 2017; Swogger and Walsh, 2018; Smith et al., 2021b). Physical dependence that can develop over time has been described as similar to that of coffee or mild opioid dependence (Brown et al., 2017). A study on dependent users (three or more daily servings) indicated that withdrawal symptoms (including insomnia, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, muscle pain or spasms, shakiness, runny eyes or nose, and hot flashes) resolved within one to 3 days for most (Singh et al., 2014). Longer duration of use and higher average dose may extend the duration and increase the severity of withdrawal, however, and a small number of individuals may find kratom very difficult to quit (Smith et al., 2021b).
Conclusions by many negative, sensationalized, or otherwise decontextualized media reports on kratom have been questionably drawn from case studies and toxicology reports which, at best, provide low levels of evidence due to unknown internal validity and generalizability and over-representation of extreme events (Merriam, 2009). Unfortunately, warnings regarding kratom exhibit features of drug hysteria (Hart, 2013), which involves the promulgation of sensational and biased information and the pursuit of legislative approaches that are disproportionate to apparent public health risks. At the public health level, drug hysteria is not only scientifically unfounded, but dangerous. In the case of kratom, misinformation can lead to dehumanization of kratom users, disinclination for people with OUD to try kratom as a substitute for opioids that are causing them harm, and the continued promotion of ineffective, draconian, and punitive policies with the potential to contribute to mass incarceration, a serious public health threat in its own right. Simultaneously, drug hysteria can contribute to the inhibition of rigorous scientific study and thereby deprive the public of scientifically-informed pharmacotherapeutic interventions (PR Newswire, 2016). Banning or criminalizing kratom, as six United States have done at the time of this writing, has the potential to create a new illicit market for kratom products, increasing the likelihood of adulteration and the use of dangerous substances as kratom substitutes. All of this results in harm to people who regularly use kratom to address pain, psychiatric problems, and SUD symptoms (Grundmann, 2017; Swogger and Walsh, 2018; Coe et al., 2019; Smith et al., 2021a; Smith et al., 2021b). Moreover, sensationalized and negative reports lead some patients to fear revealing kratom use to their healthcare providers (Smith et al., 2021b) and misinform those providers about the risks of kratom use.