Kava to become S4 [prescription only]

[MindExpansion]

Would anyone in Sydney be interested in splitting that bag ^^^ I'm sure we could arrange something between us if anyone was interested. But if not, oh well.

Peace,

Mind

[piper678]

This kava scheduling is an ill thought out mess. One part of the Government has no idea what the other part is doing.

The Australian High Commissioner in Vanuatu is taking a different view point and in a letter to the newspaper states that 2kg of kava can continue to be imported as accompanied baggage as it is a FOOD not a drug. Plus they have added that it would be expected that kava can be shared. Just how you can have a law that clearly says unprocessed kava root is Schedule 4 prescription only and yet publically accompanied by an statement which effectively says ignore this Law, no change. If you are a brown Pacific Island person you can continue to freely sharing your kava, but if you are an aboriginal person you cannot have it, and we don’t know what anyone’s attitude is if you are part brown or not, as we never thought of that. At what stage and when dose the law enforcement side step in and charge you or not for your kava social evening and can we ignore a Schedule 4 presciption only listing as even though it doesn't say so, it does not apply to us. I am utterely confused.

[Teotzlcoatl]

What the fuck is wrong with governments today?!!?

Goddamn.

Not like the U.S. is great or anything... but some of the Aussie higher-ups must have a grudge agaist botanicals.

At least salvia is being partially accepted in a number of states, where if you are 18+ it is legal to buy, grow and consume.

And THANK GOD I can LEGALLY grow tobacco in the U.S.A.!!!

I honestly thought that one was a joke at first, Tobacco cultivation being illegal... Haha!

What's next? Why don't y'all make Caapi illegal?

*Note- I'm not blaming the Aussie people, but your dipshit higher-ups*

P.S.- At least your not France, those fucks DID make Caapi illegal.

Hey France!

Edited June 23, 2008 by Teotz'

[piper678]

When certain elements in any Government go bad and don’t get their backside kicked they are all a hindrance to progress. Australia is currently being idiotic, USA is not immune from being silly either. I was in the hallowed halls of Washington DC, Food and Drug Administration at great expense in 1994, strangely enough regarding kava. Everything turned out fine, thankfully my timing was good and Dietary Supplements and Health Education Act was passed which made the FDA behave. Over to the EU now, and Kava got slapped around in Germany badly on a fake health scare, with a total ban going down by BfArM in 2002 That even took out supplying kava for the more studies, further research, latest buearecratic hurdle, this time on efficacy and against their own safety experts, The Commission E, disagreed. All health scare slurs also since proven to be wrong. What the FDA failed to do to kava in the USA, product liability insurance increases certainly took care of, and sales took a hit again as a result. Other countries, mindlessly did a “me too” and blindly followed the ban mentality based on nothing more than “well they did, so we should.”

Now to present time, Australia has the very three Nations who would protest loud enough over kava all nice and quiet at the moment. The lure to the leaders in Samoa, Tonga and Vanuatu, was a premature announcement, co-incidentally when the kava story got legs, of the long awaited guest worker scheme that may/might/could be approved. The Pacific now scared to complain in case they spoil the deal for scheme. That scheme is very locally popular, and the impact of banning kava has not sunk in, as we are also being comforted by the words of the Australian High Commissions who has a different “take” on the Law which I think is BS, but maybe I am missing something here.

Welcome to the world of the peaceful herb of the South Pacific. Yes, the arse of the Government should be booted bad for this stunt and reverse it. Will not be from the lack of trying on my end.

[baphomet]

They do have a hard on for repressing our indigenous peoples, did I say repressing I meant protecting.

Yea damn those evil white men for stopping them from beating their wifes & fucking their own children, how dare they? Just because these communities have the highest rate of child molestation in the Western World is no need for intervention surely? How dare they try to make them send their kids to school to get an education? How dare our government treat them better than other members of society by giving them more money, cars, intrest free home loans, etc?

Now lets all just keep feeling guilty and sorry for aboriginals

Or maybe we should just hug a fucking tree or something? Lets get shruman over to the antarctic! There are whales that need saving!!!

Anyways, how serious are you guys taking these warnings from the evil oppressors of consciousness? http://www.cassmd.com/library/kava.warnings.html

"Kava came under the scrutiny of the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) after a number of European reports that it might cause damage to the liver - including hepatitis, cirrhosis, and liver failure. German and Swiss health authorities have identified approximately 30 such cases, including FOUR CASES REQUIRING LIVER TRANSPLANT AND ONE DEATH. As a result, regulatory agencies in Germany, Switzerland, France, Canada, and the United Kingdom, have taken actions ranging from warning consumers about the potential risks of kava use, to removing kava-containing products from the marketplace. In the U.S., FDA has received several reports of kava-related liver damage, including a report of a PREVIOUSLY HEALTHY YOUNG WOMAN WHO REQUIRED A LIVER TRANSPLANT."

http://www.accessibility.com.au/news/new-e...to-liver-damage

Edited July 2, 2008 by baphomet

[Torsten]

The health effect of kava have been discussed AT LENGTH in several other threads. This is the legals forum so lets stay on topic.

As for the intervention: It doesn't matter if you think it is good or bad, either way the banning of kava will have a detrimental impact on indigenous people and the wider community. People who crave GABAergic drugs do not simply stop. otherwise we would be able to cure alcoholism, which is still one of the hardest addictions to break and is generally regarded as a life long disease. The problem with banning kava is that virtually all kava 'addicts' will move onto alcohol regardless of how tight the restrictions are on booze. But while kava leaves the user placid and sexually unmotivated throughout, and somewhat functional the next day, alcohol makes users aggressive, violent, sexually abusive, and useless the next day. Personally I'd prefer a kava addict to a drunk in my family any day and I am not naive enough to believe that the GABAergics addiction can be cured by an intervention.

Then again, maybe they've sent all the doctors in so they can prescribe benzos instead.

[piper678]

The Australian High Commissioner to Vanuatu written response is copied below.

Do you think the Judge will accept the High Com version of the law when someone is busted sharing their kava?

Kava will be a prescription drug from August 1st 2008 and that includes dried kava in root form. Nice of JP to offer to share his Schedule 4, prescription only substance, but IN Vanuatu, where it is a normal part of life. Damn dangerous stuff, corrupted the poor High Commissioner and even hooked the Pope in 1986, plus Hilary Clinton, Lady Bird Johnson, members of the British Royal Family, Australian Federal Police... and so on...., They get so wild on kava they obviously lose the plot so bad they even allow photographs of themselves drinking kava to be published.

From: [email protected]

Date: June 19, 2008 3:23:48 PM GMT+11:00

To: XXXXX"

Subject: Re: [sEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Dear XXXXX

The classification you are referring to refers to kava being distributed as a drug - for example, kava tablets in concentrated form. This has always been restricted although I'm told some kava medical preparations are available free of prescription and their unregulated status remains unchanged.

Kava imported for social and cultural purposes is considered to be a food and is not covered by the regulations which you highlight which refer to drugs.

As you will recall, commercial imports of kava, except for medical and scientific use, were banned last June, but personal imports of 2kilos of kava for social and cultural use were then allowed to continue. There was no regulation of how you dispose of your two kilos then and there is no new regulation now. There's no concern that incoming Pacific islanders would share their two kilos of kava with their friends (this is be expected when kava is imported for social and cultural purposes) but as the kava is supposed to be imported for social and cultural use, I can't say that incoming passengers can sell their kava, though I have heard it goes on. My point is that this is not a new "total ban on kava in Australia" as you claim - all those 2kilo bags of powdered kava will continue to go through.

You also say that the 2 kg personal imports "could be stopped after 1 August". I'm saying they are not going to be affected - the changes to drug regulations have nothing to do with this "food" trade.

Hope this helps. Perhaps we should get together for a shell sometime.

Jp

[Torsten]

The commissioner is wrong.

The scheduling states:

PIPER METHYSTICUM (kava) in preparations for human use except when included on

the Australian Register of Therapeutic Goods in preparations:

and then goes on to list a number of types of therapeutic preparations.

Let's dissect the scheduling. The TGA defines "preparations" as any material that has had human actions applied to it. In several other discussions with the TGA in regards to plant materials this was clarified to mean any plant as soon as it has been acted on by humans. Specifically as soon as you harvest a plant it automatically becomes a preparation.

If such a preparation is then labelled with therapeutic claims of any kind, the product then becomes a 'therapeutic preparation'. This distinction is VERY important because most of the herb schedulings refer to 'therapeutic preparations'. The kava scheduling however is clear that it includes all preparations, ie any plant material post harvest.

If you are still unclear as to the intentions of the TGA then I will post the 'record of reason' that eld to the scheduling. It clearly outlines how the scheduling includes raw peeled root because of the abuse potential and negative social effects in indigenous communities. see below

[Torsten]

http://tga.gov.au/ndpsc/record/rr200802.pdf

11.2 PIPER METHYSTICUM (KAVA)

PURPOSE

The Committee considered the Schedule 4 entry for Piper methysticum (kava).

BACKGROUND

At the October 2003 NDPSC Meeting, the Committee noted a safety evaluation report

prepared by the Kava Evaluation Group/ Office of Complementary Medicines on kava

containing medicines, which made recommendations on the regulation of kava as an

ingredient in Listed Medicines. Due to the potential risk of liver toxicity from use of

non-aqueous extracts of kava plants at high doses, the Committee considered there

was a need to restrict the use of alcohol/ acetone extracts of kava, including those for

bulk supply to health care practitioners for use in extemporaneous compounding.

The February 2004 NDPSC Meeting was advised that the Complementary Medicines

Evaluation Committee (CMEC) Recommendation 41.3 regarding the listing and

registration of kava had been included in Schedule 4 of the Therapeutic Goods

Regulations 1990 (TG Regulations). This recommendation only allowed specified

concentrations of aqueous kava extracts in Listed medicines and required that all other

kava products be cancelled from the ARTG. The Committee agreed to foreshadow

National Drugs and Poisons Schedule Committee

Record of Reasons of Meeting 52 - February 2008 108

the inclusion of kava in Schedule 4 of the SUSDP with exemptions consistent with

those specified in the TG Regulations.

The June 2004 NDPSC Meeting, on the grounds of public health and safety, agreed to

include kava in Schedule 4, as well as adopt the exemptions specified in the TG

Regulations. The Committee confirmed the decision at the October 2004 Meeting.

At the October 2005 Meeting the Committee confirmed that all parts of the Schedule

4 exemption for oral use for kava required the mandatory warning statement. The

Committee agreed that the only exception to this should be for preparations

containing less than 25 mg kavalactones and agreed to amend the Schedule 4 entry for

kava to clarify this ambiguity.

The October 2007 NDPSC Meeting considered a proposal from XXXXX which

requested the removal of the current exemption from scheduling for the whole or

peeled rhizome of kava. This request was part of the Australian Government’s efforts

to reduce the abuse of the substance in some indigenous communities. The Committee

agreed to foreshadow consideration of this issue at the February 2008 NDPSC

Meeting.

DISCUSSION - SUBMISSIONS

The Committee recalled that, at the October 2007 Meeting, a submission was received

from XXXXX stating that that the potential for abuse and, thus, hazards to public

health of the whole or peeled rhizome of this substance being exempted from

scheduling was such that it warranted this exemption being removed from the

Schedule 4 entry. A brief summary of XXXXX submission follows:

• As of 26 June 2007 the Australian Government had banned the commercial

importation of kava except for medical or scientific purposes.

• The raw form of kava was an abusable substance and the current exemption for it

from the requirements of scheduling opened a pathway for diversion to illicit uses.

• When used in a traditional manner kava had a sedative/ relaxing effect. However,

when used excessively (240 – 440g/ week or more), health problems could occur.

It was also stated that there had been reports of the general apathy from overuse

resulting in the neglect of children’s welfaede and decreased participation in work.

• The potential hazards associated with the use of kava were dose-dependant and

‘traditional’ use had not been reported to cause any serious health effects.

However, high or excessive use may result in both adverse health and social

hazards

• In the early 1980s, kava imports to one community were estimated to be 24kg/

month. Since then this increased to an estimated 124kg/ month in the same

community. It was further asserted that this increase in access had increased the

abuse potential of the substance, with average consumption increasing from

145g/week in 1989 – 1990 to 370g/week in 1990 – 1991

• It was stated that, due to its use as an alternative to alcohol, some of this use of

kava by the indigenous community had not been in the traditional Pacific Islander

National Drugs and Poisons Schedule Committee

Record of Reasons of Meeting 52 - February 2008 109

manner and that, given this, there was a very real possibility that raw kava

imported for medical use may be diverted for illegitimate uses.

• It was stated that it was unlikely that the tablet, capsule or teabags currently listed

on the ARTG would be abused and, thus, the scheduling for these should not be

altered.

The Committee also recalled that, whilst XXXXX was in agreement with this

proposal, it stated that this must be achieved while still allowing bona fide medicinal

forms of the substance to be available to practitioners. XXXXX stated that one way to

ensure this would be to amend the schedule entry to make reference to only those

substances included on the Australian Register of Therapeutic Goods (ARTG). The

Committee considered this and agreed to send the entry to DAP for drafting.

The Committee also recalled that a number of stakeholders made suggestions on the

amended Schedule 4 entry and these were referred to the DAP for finalising.

The Committee considered an issue analysis (Kava and after in the Nhulunbuy (Gulf

of Carpentaria) Hinterland, Hughes, H., Centre for Independent Studies) published in

October 2007,which looked at the effects of the Northern Territory’s Kava

Management Programme and the provision of kava to indigenous communities in the

NT. The following points were made:

• The author briefly reviewed the history of kava use in the NT and the regulation,

import and supply of kava in Australia through the TGA, FSANZ, Australian

Customs Service and the NT Government’s Kava Management Programme.

• Hughes stated that under the NT’s kava program, the linking of kava sales to

income for settlements encouraged an increase in kava consumption until ‘some

settlements became incapacitated for several days each week’. It was noted that

kava was sold in the NT in 100g packs, whereas kava available as a therapeutic

good was supplied in bottles of 60 x 2g tablets (totalling 120g kava). The author

noted that research has shown that consumption greater than 240 – 400g per week

was considered to be unhealthy. The author noted that the maximum weekly sales

limit per person in indigenous communities was 400g and that, in 2006, official

consumption was reported as 380g/ person/ week, however, the author states

actual consumption may be higher than this due to black market kava and the

unreliability of the recorded figures. The author presented figures which showed

that kava imports consisted of 10 tonnes in 1997, peaked at 80 tonnes in 2002 and

that there were 73 tonnes imported in 2006. The author stated that of the 80 tonnes

imported in 2005, approximately 40% was used by registered kava drinkers

(numbering 1,235) with the rest of the use being widespread in therapeutic goods

or by immigrants from the South Pacific, thus the weekly consumption via these

routes was modest and would not lead to health risks. The adverse events

associated with high kava consumption were also discussed.

• The author stated that, due to this excessive use and the social and health effects

stemming from it, the Commonwealth Government had no choice but to cease

kava imports in June 2007, allowing import only for medical/ scientific purposes

or the personal importation of up to 2kg in accompanied baggage. It was noted

that there had been objections from those who had previously benefited from the

National Drugs and Poisons Schedule Committee

Record of Reasons of Meeting 52 - February 2008 110

sales of kava, but the author stated that there had also been approval from women

and remote settlement leaders at the ending of the kava drinking sessions and the

release of the money spent on kava into the family budget.

• The author also stated, however, that ending kava sales would only have a positive

effect if other factors which also cause disfunctionality in these communities were

tackled. If these were not also corrected, the author stated that the use of drugs and

alcohol was likely to replace the use of kava.

XXXXX supported the proposed change to the Schedule 4 entry for kava.

The Committee endeavoured to allow affected parties the opportunity to provide input

on this matter by foreshadowing a decision for the February 2008 Meeting. However

no other public submissions on this matter were received.

DISCUSSION – RELEVANT MATTERS UNDER 52E

A Member noted that the WHO had, in 2007, published a report on the hepatotoxicity

risks of kava containing products. Members stated that, while they had not seen the

report directly, it had been referred to in the Hughes article and that this article stated

that the WHO recommended kava be a prescription substance. Members also noted

that the WHO report was on the hepatotoxicity of kava, while the Committees current

considerations and concerns were related to the abuse potential and follow-on social

effects of the substance and ways in which these might be reduced (this is relevant to

S52E (1)©, (g), (i) - potential hazards, abuse potential and other matters to protect

public health).

Members noted that the DAP had confirmed that there was a need to include a

reference to the ARTG in the schedule entry in order to achieve the intent of the

Committee while still allowing bona fide medicinal forms of the substance to be

available to practitioners (this is relevant to S52E (1)(f) the need for access).

RESOLUTION 2008/52 - 21

The Committee decided to remove the exemption for whole or peeled rhizome from

the Schedule 4 entry for Piper methysticum.

Schedule 4 - Amendment

PIPER METHYSTICUM (kava) in preparations for human use except when included

on the Australian Register of Therapeutic Goods in preparations:

(a) for oral use when present in tablet, capsule or teabag

form that is labelled with a recommended maximum

daily dose of 250 mg or less of kavalactones, and;

(i) the tablet or capsule form contains 125 mg or

less of kavalactones per tablet or capsule; or

National Drugs and Poisons Schedule Committee

Record of Reasons of Meeting 52 - February 2008 111

(ii) the amount of dried whole or peeled rhizome in

the teabag does not exceed 3 g;

and, where containing more than 25 mg of kavalactones

per dose, compliant with the requirements of the

Required Advisory Statements for Medicine Labels;

( in topical preparations for use on the rectum, vagina or

throat containing dried whole or peeled rhizome or

containing aqueous dispersions or aqueous extracts of

whole of peeled rhizome; or

© in dermal preparations.

[Torsten]

Pretty amazing that the government itself doesn't know what laws it is passing. It seems that other than the TGA and myself no one is actually grasping the reality of this.

[baphomet]

Herbalistics stopped selling it a while back for legal reasons, it seems their decision was a little premature, they must have gotten their timing wrong?

[Torsten]

We already know they are not too good with reading and interpreting legislation so this is no surprise.

A lot of people stopped selling it a few months ago when the import changes happened. Strangely enough a lot of people also stopped buying it around the same time. I get a lot of comments in my webstore about how surprised people are we still stock it because they 'heard' it was now illegal. Kava sales dropped by about 50% at that time. Funny how a little bit of bad press can confuse people.

[piper678]

Pretty amazing that the government itself doesn't know what laws it is passing. It seems that other than the TGA and myself no one is actually grasping the reality of this.

One part of the Government does not know what the other part has done, and when alerted to what this means in Law have failed even show a basic understanding of law.

Phone Conversation with Office of Chemical Safety in June 2008 (Under TGA, charged with “looking after” kava imports since the July 1997 import ban on raw kava)

Q. This new kava scheduling, now broadened to include raw kava, it has me concerned, what are the health issues that caused this?

A. There was NO health issues, this is to stop the abuse of kava in aboriginal communities.

In writing I received, part extract as follows :-

Kava (piper methysticum) has been listed in schedule 4 of the SUSDP since 2004, with exemptions based on the form of the product and the concentration of kava lactones. The most recent decision was to amend the existing schedule 4 entry to prevent raw kava potentially being supplied as a therapeutic product without prescription.

Now it gets interesting:-

From a TGA “source”:-

Under TGA law you are allowed to bring in 3 months personal supply of any medicine for yourself or your family. This can even be posted in, provided it is for therapeutic purposes, which can be self prescribed. The NZ poison laws are harmonised with Australia, so they may well be considering a similar development there.

To be able to mail kava in… OK that's good, as currently Australian customs stops postage or via air freight courier on entry and it is enforced. So on August 1st 2008 I can get 3 months supply and self prescribe for my condition that only kava can help. Fantastic. Except …. what is the dosage? No Australian regulatory body or the Universities, despite repeated requests since late 1990’s have not been able to give me their HPLC protocols for measuring the 6 kavalactones the rest of the World uses to calculate the percentage of the kavalactone content. I can only presume they don’t have a protocol, don’t have the standards and have no idea what I am talking about. The only dosage for raw kava prepared as a beverage is anecdotal. XXXXX in his NDPSC submission says 300 to 400gms of kava a week, but makes no attempt to define if this is the weight of the kava itself or the amount of kavalactones. I have to presume he is talking the active ingredients, as to just say kava is far to unscientific, and NDPSC is a science based Committee. The kavalactones per week would be loosely correct, as it would match or be under a typical Vanuatu kava bar patron, non binge non abuse just normal amount of consumption.

An average Nobel Vanuatu kava (Nobel is the drinking varieties used for thousands of years) of 80% root stump and 20% lateral root as an aged plant in nature occurs will have a kavalactone content of 6% That 6% total kavalactones will be made up of approximately 50% of the Kavain kavalactone, the “feel good” one that distinguishes good in body effect from junk kava.

Since I question if I can self prescribe, to err on the side of caution I will get a doctor prescription. The legislation allows for any doctor recognised in their own country to prescribe. So a traditonal doctor, known as a “Kleva” in Vanuatu who may not be able to read and write but who is a doctor never the less will be fine as it will comply with the law. And if I take XXXXX dosage, average to 350gms of kavalactones to be fair, I can bring in 278.4kg of kava for my 3 months supply, a little too heavy for the postal service so that is the only problem to solve now.

People who need kava to assist their condition should be rejoicing with this new law as the packaging should only have to read “Supply without a prescription is Illegal” and possibly extended to include “Not to be supplied to Aboriginal persons.”

Edited July 3, 2008 by piper678

[Torsten]

Slight mistake here. You can't self prescribe. The TGA allows 3 months of meds as personal imports as long as they comply with restrictions here. For a prescription drug this means you must have a prescription. For example, melatonin is S4 in australia and requires prescription. As it is rarely available overseas it can be imported by mail, but you must hold a valid prescription to get it through customs legally.

The 3 months import laws are pretty much to make life for customs easier. When travellers come from overseas they often bring meds with them and if you didn't have the 3 months window then customs would have to differentiate between holidayers and returnign citizens. So it's easiest to just give everyone 3 months.

For kava products this has meant so far that you were allowed to bring in any product with proper dosage labelling on your person without permit to the total of 3 months supply. People were abusing this by writing on their huge raw kava bags to take 500g per day, so the limit was lowered to a total of 2 kilos raw kava [or was it 3 kilos? - can't remember]. Curiously there was still no limit for extracts and I know someone who brought in 2 kilos of 80% extract with the appropriate labelling.

I think the law is quite clear and the intentions of the TGA are there in black and white. I would be interested what the high commissioner has to say to that.

[piper678]

I would be interested what the high commissioner has to say to that.

High Commissioner ducking for cover and referring me to Health Ministry. They are a tardy bunch in there so I will ask for some direct names and numbers. Stay tuned...

I am curious now, how do other medications that are prescription items but not on PBS so far cheaper to on-line order from overseas get on with this prescription deal and customs? Any problems you are aware of, as I am aware of none. I have seen sites with instant prescription too, and perhaps that is what it is for, but I thought it was for online credit card payment gateways system Visa and MasterCard compliance, not for customs.

[Torsten]

to import a medicine that is 'prescription only' into australia you need to have an australian prescription, unless you are travelling from overseas and you carry an overseas prescription with you at the time you try to import the goods.

I am pretty sure that an overseas prescription does not allow you to import a prescription medicine into australia.

The many spam mails that advertise for prescription service are aimed at the american market which has a different system.

Basically you need to understand that the 3 month is not a permission, but rather a limitation. ie, the govvy has no problem for you to import your own drugs [as long as you comply with australian restrictions such as prescription etc], but it does have a problem with people importing quantities of drugs for resale. Hence the 3 months limit. Also, when these rules were made the TGA used to meet once every 3 months and would make decisions which take effect within 3 months. By limiting the import to 3 months the TGA has insured that no one can order a stash of drugs that carries them beyond the legal availability of that drug within this country.

[piper678]

One part of the Government does not know what the other part has done, and when alerted to what this means in Law have failed even show a basic understanding of law.

From a TGA “source”:-

Under TGA law you are allowed to bring in 3 months personal supply of any medicine for yourself or your family. This can even be posted in, provided it is for therapeutic purposes, which can be self prescribed. The NZ poison laws are harmonised with Australia, so they may well be considering a similar development there.

Not only is the High Commissioner wrong or confused, at least one TGA person obviously does not know what they are talking about either. Shame I never got the 3 month personal importation scheme rule interpretation from a TGA employee in writing as it is again 100% wrong information.

This is on TGA website...

The Scheme does not allow either the importation of drugs prohibited by Customs legislation.

Go to Customs website...

Kava is prohibited.

The existing approval that allows for the import of up to 2 kg of kava in the accompanied baggage of an incoming passenger (aged 18 years or over) to Australia will continue. This recognises that kava has traditional ceremonial and cultural uses for people of South Pacific Islander descent

Interesting as there is evidence of the Torres Straight Islanders traditonal kava use. Makes sense as kava was and is still used just a short canoe ride away in Daru, Papua New Guinea. However the XXXXX from the NPDSC submission is in his new job in Townsville. Maybe about to block the evil kava again?? XXXXX is a prolific author of volumes of kava “studies” in the Northern Territory but no other scientist in the World can reproduce anything remotely like his results. The Menzies School of Health has responded to a freedom of Information request to the source of funding for these “studies” with a claim it will take them 200 hours, require permission of a third party (interesting) and will cost over $6000.00 Every other University or scientist has produced kava study source of funding free of charge and generally with a pleasant phone call from the scientist/ researcher, happy to take an interest, but not this mob. Very strange indeed.

I only started asking questions initially as I was concerned there was actually a real health problem. Once again there is not. NDPSC did not make a scientific based decision with kava. I would have thought there would be some form of legal obligation to do so, and not rely only on an opinion piece from an aging economist quoting dodgy science and then claim they considered health when the whole lot of it is a crock of shit. Something stinks bad here.

Edited July 3, 2008 by piper678

[Torsten]

curious situation. so you are allowed to bring in 2 kilos on your person when entering the country, but then you are not allowed to possess it unless you hold a presciption. not really workable.

[Torsten]

last call for kava. I am trying to juggle pending orders with the fact I want to get rid of it all by wednesday, so what is in the webstore now is probably all there is. If any bulk purchase offers decline I'll update the shop.

[FNF72]

Now, not being leaglly minded, after reading this I am still a bit confused - is it only the raw powder that has been scheduled or ALL products containg kava (ie kava tablets or tinctures as well) - I ask as I noticed on a certain Aus website know for selling other "borderline" products discussed on these forums are now stocking the tablets since the ban came into place on Sept 1

As for the prescribing side of things - would presription by formally registered naturopath (for example) be allowable under the new laws or would it strictly be GP's? Does the legislation cover that as well - or has it been totally overlooked?

[Torsten]

Now, not being leaglly minded, after reading this I am still a bit confused - is it only the raw powder that has been scheduled or ALL products containg kava (ie kava tablets or tinctures as well) - I ask as I noticed on a certain Aus website know for selling other "borderline" products discussed on these forums are now stocking the tablets since the ban came into place on Sept 1

Only products registered with the TGA are now permitted. They will need to carry their registration number.

As for the prescribing side of things - would presription by formally registered naturopath (for example) be allowable under the new laws or would it strictly be GP's? Does the legislation cover that as well - or has it been totally overlooked?

Naturopaths can't prescribe S2/3/4 medications.

[FNF72]

Thanks for the clarification Torsten!

Got a very unsurprising "I dont know anything about it yet" answer off the GP when enquiring about scripts earlier today.....

[Ace]

Just for clarification purposes, I am heading to Vanuatu in a few months (mid Jan 09) and hope to bring a few bags of kava back to Aus (like I did a few years back (~2005) no worries), however after reading this it looks like importing herbal preparations of kava (dried bagged herbal material) is now illegal (or will be tomorrow).

Could I get confirmation of the import legalities for my own info because I dont want to have any hassles coming back to Aus - better off just consuming it whilst overseas and not trying to bring any home than risk fines or whatever they might have in place. If what I've read so far is going to be current in Jan then it appears it will not be possible but I thought it might be worth asking in case.

And for clarification purposes, the kava would not be used medicinally (so no prescription), it would be recreationally as it is often used in the South Pacific. Would it be worth trying to get a prescription and claiming medicinal use then importing it as part of my 'treatment' or is it unlikely to be an avenue worthy of pursual?

Sorry if this has been discussed, just want to see if there has been any updates that might be useful in my situation. Cheers

[AndyAmine.]

AFAIK bringing back 2kgs for personal use in your luggage is still ok.

Im sure T can confirm this.

[Torsten]

I don't think it is OK. You can only bring S4 substances into australia on your person if you have a prescription for them [ie the bottle is officially labelled with your name]. Kava is now S4 so these rules apply to it. Mind you, it would be worth a try. If you declare it then nothing much can happen to you. Surely HEAPS of people find themselves in the same situation and I doubt they are getting locked up.