Great investigation and journalism by Todd Spangler from the Detroit Free Press.

---

Final verdict:

“...it appears that El-Sayed made criticisms within ordinary bounds as a commentator or candidate.”

– Todd Spangler, Detroit Free Press

I'm trying to find out some more information about these two candidates. If someone could direct me to some news articles or information about their policy stances that would be appreciated. Please and thank you

Have you seen the recent smear ads about Abdul el-sayed? Brought to you by the united democracy project? The UDP is affiliated with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee or (AIPAC). This is how you know he's the right choice. Remove PAC money from politics.

I believe that Mallory McMorrow would have had a surprising performance getting second place, but Abdul El-Sayed would have eventually won by a slim margin and she would’ve endorsed him soon after. What do you think?

For those Conservatives voting in the Primary Election in August...

Are you voting Republican, or are you stirring the Democrat pot?

. . . creepier than Perry Johnson.

The Michigan House passed HB 5537 on March 18th — a bill that would make it a criminal misdemeanor to grow, sell, import, or distribute kratom in Michigan, carrying up to 90 days in jail and $5,000 in fines for a first offense.

https://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2025-2026/billintroduced/House/pdf/2026-HIB-5537.pdf

I’m not here to argue kratom is safe, or that the current unregulated market is acceptable. It isn’t. But the way this bill was pushed through, and the campaign being used to justify it, deserve serious scrutiny.

How It Got Passed

HB 5537 was fast-tracked to the House floor with no committee hearings. It was forced to a roll call vote with no floor debate, a process that took under 30 minutes

(https://ground.news/article/michigan-house-passes-legislation-to-prohibit-the-growth-and-sale-of-kratom-in-the-state)

The final tally was 56-43, along partisan lines.

(https://www.abc12.com/news/state/michigan-house-passes-bill-that-would-ban-kratom-sales-entirely/article_72ff7e17-142c-4578-a2c5-b0de69d09aa6.html)

No testimony from public health experts. No debate on whether a blanket ban is even the right tool.

When former co-sponsors switched their votes, bill sponsor Rep. Cam Cavitt blamed lobbyist money rather than engage with the substantive arguments.

This is how you pass a bill you know can’t survive scrutiny.

The Fear Campaign and What’s Actually True

On March 23rd, Cavitt appeared on Michigan Public Radio’s Stateside with April Baer to make his case. I want to walk through his specific claims. (https://www.michiganpublic.org/stateside/2026-03-23/stateside-monday-march-23-2026)

“China doesn’t let its own citizens take kratom — they know something we don’t.”

This is the centerpiece of his argument and it collapsed in real time. Host April Baer immediately pointed out that China also bans cannabis and pornography, both legal in Michigan. Cavitt had no real response. The China framing is designed to route a pharmacology debate through national security anxiety. It’s not a public health argument.

“It’s not kratom itself, it’s the chemical component 7-OH.”

This is Cavitt’s most telling moment because he’s correct. He accurately explained that manufacturers synthesize and spike products with 7-hydroxymitragynine (7-OH) to boost potency, and that’s where the real danger lies.

Michigan Medicine confirmed this: “7-OH, which is made in a lab and not from the kratom plant, is 10 times more potent and addictive than the main active component of kratom, and has been associated with fatal overdoses.” (https://bluewaterhealthyliving.com/news/local-news/michigan/michigan-house-passes-kratom-ban-now-what-happens/)

Cavitt diagnosed the actual problem, “Adulterated, lab-synthesized extracts”, then proposed banning the leaf anyway.

“Overdoses are growing — coroners are seeing more and more.”

When Baer asked directly whether the state has kept any statistics on kratom overdoses, Cavitt said: “No, they’re just discovering more and more as the product is getting more pervasive. Coroners are starting to screen for it.” He admitted his “growing overdoses” claim is based on increased detection, not established causation.

More screening finds more presence. That’s not the same thing.

The peer-reviewed literature backs this up:

• A 2024 commentary in Frontiers in Psychiatry concluded that most kratom-associated fatalities involve polydrug exposures, and that deaths may “erroneously include kratom as a contributory but not causative agent, even if other substances are present.”

Crucially: no causative lethal blood concentration for mitragynine has ever been established in humans. (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11153780/)

• A 2024 Frontiers in Pharmacology review found that in controlled NIDA studies, whole-leaf kratom administration produced no respiratory depression and all vital signs remained normal.

No lethal dose for kratom or its alkaloids has been established. (https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/pharmacology/articles/10.3389/fphar.2024.1403140/full)

• A 2019 study in Preventive Medicine estimated the risk of overdose death from opioids is over 1,000 times greater than from mitragynine alone. (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31647958/)

• A systematic review on kratom overdose risk found the overwhelming majority of cases with severe outcomes involved polydrug co-ingestion, not kratom alone. (https://www.kslegislature.gov/li_2024/b2023_24/committees/ctte_h_fed_st_1/documents/testimony/20230201_16.pdf)

“It’s marketed to children.”

When Baer asked if anyone had actually researched what percentage of buyers are under 18, Cavitt said: “That’s a great question and not that I’m aware of. No.”

The entire children-at-risk framing is built on packaging aesthetics (gummy bears and cotton candy flavors) with zero consumption data to support it and missing the point that regulation would solve this.

Lastly, He got the basic botany wrong.

Cavitt called kratom “a byproduct of a conifer tree” and claimed China is the number one producer. Kratom (Mitragyna speciosa) is a tropical hardwood in the coffee family, native to Southeast Asia.

Indonesia is by far the largest producer, Not China.

These aren’t minor errors. They suggest someone working from talking points, not research. (Calling Oxycontin “oxytocin” is a minor error and also shows he doesn’t really care about the science)

What I Did

I wrote a measured letter to Rep. Cavitt, my own representative, and the Regulation Reform Commission acknowledging that the current unregulated market is a legitimate problem, particularly the unregulated 7-OH extract products, and making the case that the Kratom Consumer Protection Act framework (age restrictions, labeling requirements, product testing, 7-OH concentration limits) is the appropriate policy response.

I didn’t hear back from any of them for weeks. Not because they were busy. Because the media campaign was already in motion.

What Needs to Happen

The bill now goes to the Michigan Senate, where Democrats hold the majority. This is where it can be stopped or redirected toward actual evidence-based regulation. If you want to contact your senator, you can find them at (https://senate.michigan.gov/senators/all-senators/)

My argument isn’t “kratom is safe.” It’s that a blanket criminal ban on a plant, pushed through without debate, justified by factual errors and fear framing, and aimed at the wrong target, is bad policy and governance.

Regulate the extracts. Require testing and labeling. Set age restrictions. Don’t criminalize adults for using a leaf while the actual dangerous products (unregulated synthetic 7-OH) get swept into the same prohibition and will simply move to the black market.

Wisconsin and Indiana banned it. People just drive to Michigan to buy it. Cavitt mentioned this himself as evidence the ban is working. It isn’t. It’s evidence prohibition doesn’t work.

Sources linked throughout. Happy to discuss in comments.

If Abdul El-Sayed won by 5% or more in the general election, that might change the narrative that a left-wing populist can win decisively in a swing state like Michigan. If he won by 3% or less, would that suggest his coalition is more limited, or would it simply reflect how competitive Michigan has become? What margin do you think would be politically significant?