ingest cdrApp 2018-05-04T18:53:47.607Z c22f0bb7-cdb0-407c-9359-651adb49c9b5 modifyDatastreamByValue MD_DESCRIPTIVE cdrApp 2018-05-10T17:36:25.707Z modifyDatastreamByValue MD_DESCRIPTIVE cdrApp 2018-05-11T21:59:09.007Z modifyDatastreamByValue MD_DESCRIPTIVE cdrApp 2018-06-02T04:04:44.124Z modifyDatastreamByValue MD_DESCRIPTIVE cdrApp 2018-06-14T01:50:42.313Z modifyDatastreamByValue MD_DESCRIPTIVE cdrApp 2018-08-28T20:14:08.018Z modifyDatastreamByValue MD_DESCRIPTIVE cdrApp 2018-09-11T01:25:22.169Z modifyDatastreamByValue MD_DESCRIPTIVE cdrApp 2018-09-25T18:36:53.467Z modifyDatastreamByValue MD_DESCRIPTIVE cdrApp 2019-02-25T13:29:04.392Z modifyDatastreamByValue MD_DESCRIPTIVE cdrApp 2019-02-28T02:49:51.401Z Creator Dmitriy Nikitin Department of Health Policy and Management Gillings School of Global Public Health MSPH Health Policy Management 2018-05 2018 Objective: Examine the online industry for kratom (Mitragyna speciosa), a plant-based substance used by Americans as an opioid alternative, and provide context to the market amidst regulatory attempts by the Food and Drug Administration and numerous state legislatures. Methods: Using search results collected from the three most widely used search engines, 663 websites were identified selling kratom products to US consumers. The top 100 most visited online vendors were selected and the content of their website and social media profiles were coded for topics including location, payment and shipping options, age verification, health warnings and disclaimers, grassroots advocacy regarding upcoming state and federal regulations, and response to the recent kratom-linked Salmonella outbreak. Results: 25% of vendors made claims that kratom provided relief from opioid withdrawal. 81% of vendors featured a disclaimer that kratom is addictive, with 54% stating that the product is not FDA approved. Only 5% of vendors utilized effective age verification through confirming age on delivery or use of a third party online database. Enforcement of state and locality bans on the vendor's part varied by location; 65% vendors did not sell to Indiana whereas only 27% prohibited sales to Rhode Island. Conclusions: The kratom internet vendor industry (KIV) was found to have low adherence to US state-level restrictions on the products’ purchase. There is a high prevalence of health claims featured on vendor webpages that are discouraged by the Food and Drug Administration. eng text Masters Paper University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Degree granting institution Thesis advisor Justin Trogdon Creator Dmitriy Nikitin Department of Health Policy and Management Gillings School of Global Public Health MSPH Health Policy Management 2018-05 2018 Objective: Examine the online industry for kratom (Mitragyna speciosa), a plant-based substance used by Americans as an opioid alternative, and provide context to the market amidst regulatory attempts by the Food and Drug Administration and numerous state legislatures. Methods: Using search results collected from the three most widely used search engines, 663 websites were identified selling kratom products to US consumers. The top 100 most visited online vendors were selected and the content of their website and social media profiles were coded for topics including location, payment and shipping options, age verification, health warnings and disclaimers, grassroots advocacy regarding upcoming state and federal regulations, and response to the recent kratom-linked Salmonella outbreak. Results: 25% of vendors made claims that kratom provided relief from opioid withdrawal. 81% of vendors featured a disclaimer that kratom is addictive, with 54% stating that the product is not FDA approved. Only 5% of vendors utilized effective age verification through confirming age on delivery or use of a third party online database. Enforcement of state and locality bans on the vendor's part varied by location; 65% vendors did not sell to Indiana whereas only 27% prohibited sales to Rhode Island. Conclusions: The kratom internet vendor industry (KIV) was found to have low adherence to US state-level restrictions on the products’ purchase. There is a high prevalence of health claims featured on vendor webpages that are discouraged by the Food and Drug Administration. eng text Masters Paper University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Degree granting institution Thesis advisor Justin Trogdon Creator Dmitriy Nikitin Department of Health Policy and Management Gillings School of Global Public Health MSPH Health Policy Management 2018-05 2018 Objective: Examine the online industry for kratom (Mitragyna speciosa), a plant-based substance used by Americans as an opioid alternative, and provide context to the market amidst regulatory attempts by the Food and Drug Administration and numerous state legislatures. Methods: Using search results collected from the three most widely used search engines, 663 websites were identified selling kratom products to US consumers. The top 100 most visited online vendors were selected and the content of their website and social media profiles were coded for topics including location, payment and shipping options, age verification, health warnings and disclaimers, grassroots advocacy regarding upcoming state and federal regulations, and response to the recent kratom-linked Salmonella outbreak. Results: 25% of vendors made claims that kratom provided relief from opioid withdrawal. 81% of vendors featured a disclaimer that kratom is addictive, with 54% stating that the product is not FDA approved. Only 5% of vendors utilized effective age verification through confirming age on delivery or use of a third party online database. Enforcement of state and locality bans on the vendor's part varied by location; 65% vendors did not sell to Indiana whereas only 27% prohibited sales to Rhode Island. Conclusions: The kratom internet vendor industry (KIV) was found to have low adherence to US state-level restrictions on the products’ purchase. There is a high prevalence of health claims featured on vendor webpages that are discouraged by the Food and Drug Administration. eng text Masters Paper University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Degree granting institution Thesis advisor Justin Trogdon Creator Dmitriy Nikitin Department of Health Policy and Management Gillings School of Global Public Health MSPH Health Policy Management 2018-05 2018 Objective: Examine the online industry for kratom (Mitragyna speciosa), a plant-based substance used by Americans as an opioid alternative, and provide context to the market amidst regulatory attempts by the Food and Drug Administration and numerous state legislatures. Methods: Using search results collected from the three most widely used search engines, 663 websites were identified selling kratom products to US consumers. The top 100 most visited online vendors were selected and the content of their website and social media profiles were coded for topics including location, payment and shipping options, age verification, health warnings and disclaimers, grassroots advocacy regarding upcoming state and federal regulations, and response to the recent kratom-linked Salmonella outbreak. Results: 25% of vendors made claims that kratom provided relief from opioid withdrawal. 81% of vendors featured a disclaimer that kratom is addictive, with 54% stating that the product is not FDA approved. Only 5% of vendors utilized effective age verification through confirming age on delivery or use of a third party online database. Enforcement of state and locality bans on the vendor's part varied by location; 65% vendors did not sell to Indiana whereas only 27% prohibited sales to Rhode Island. Conclusions: The kratom internet vendor industry (KIV) was found to have low adherence to US state-level restrictions on the products’ purchase. There is a high prevalence of health claims featured on vendor webpages that are discouraged by the Food and Drug Administration. eng text Masters Paper University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Degree granting institution Thesis advisor Justin Trogdon Creator Dmitriy Nikitin Department of Health Policy and Management Gillings School of Global Public Health MSPH Health Policy Management 2018-05 2018 Objective: Examine the online industry for kratom (Mitragyna speciosa), a plant-based substance used by Americans as an opioid alternative, and provide context to the market amidst regulatory attempts by the Food and Drug Administration and numerous state legislatures. Methods: Using search results collected from the three most widely used search engines, 663 websites were identified selling kratom products to US consumers. The top 100 most visited online vendors were selected and the content of their website and social media profiles were coded for topics including location, payment and shipping options, age verification, health warnings and disclaimers, grassroots advocacy regarding upcoming state and federal regulations, and response to the recent kratom-linked Salmonella outbreak. Results: 25% of vendors made claims that kratom provided relief from opioid withdrawal. 81% of vendors featured a disclaimer that kratom is addictive, with 54% stating that the product is not FDA approved. Only 5% of vendors utilized effective age verification through confirming age on delivery or use of a third party online database. Enforcement of state and locality bans on the vendor's part varied by location; 65% vendors did not sell to Indiana whereas only 27% prohibited sales to Rhode Island. Conclusions: The kratom internet vendor industry (KIV) was found to have low adherence to US state-level restrictions on the products’ purchase. There is a high prevalence of health claims featured on vendor webpages that are discouraged by the Food and Drug Administration. eng text Masters Paper University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Degree granting institution Thesis advisor Justin Trogdon Creator Dmitriy Nikitin Department of Health Policy and Management Gillings School of Global Public Health MSPH Health Policy Management 2018-05 2018 University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Degree granting institution Objective: Examine the online industry for kratom (Mitragyna speciosa), a plant-based substance used by Americans as an opioid alternative, and provide context to the market amidst regulatory attempts by the Food and Drug Administration and numerous state legislatures. Methods: Using search results collected from the three most widely used search engines, 663 websites were identified selling kratom products to US consumers. The top 100 most visited online vendors were selected and the content of their website and social media profiles were coded for topics including location, payment and shipping options, age verification, health warnings and disclaimers, grassroots advocacy regarding upcoming state and federal regulations, and response to the recent kratom-linked Salmonella outbreak. Results: 25% of vendors made claims that kratom provided relief from opioid withdrawal. 81% of vendors featured a disclaimer that kratom is addictive, with 54% stating that the product is not FDA approved. Only 5% of vendors utilized effective age verification through confirming age on delivery or use of a third party online database. Enforcement of state and locality bans on the vendor's part varied by location; 65% vendors did not sell to Indiana whereas only 27% prohibited sales to Rhode Island. Conclusions: The kratom internet vendor industry (KIV) was found to have low adherence to US state-level restrictions on the products’ purchase. There is a high prevalence of health claims featured on vendor webpages that are discouraged by the Food and Drug Administration. eng text Masters Paper Justin Trogdon Thesis advisor Creator Dmitriy Nikitin Department of Health Policy and Management Gillings School of Global Public Health MSPH Health Policy Management 2018-05 2018 University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Degree granting institution Objective: Examine the online industry for kratom (Mitragyna speciosa), a plant-based substance used by Americans as an opioid alternative, and provide context to the market amidst regulatory attempts by the Food and Drug Administration and numerous state legislatures. Methods: Using search results collected from the three most widely used search engines, 663 websites were identified selling kratom products to US consumers. The top 100 most visited online vendors were selected and the content of their website and social media profiles were coded for topics including location, payment and shipping options, age verification, health warnings and disclaimers, grassroots advocacy regarding upcoming state and federal regulations, and response to the recent kratom-linked Salmonella outbreak. Results: 25% of vendors made claims that kratom provided relief from opioid withdrawal. 81% of vendors featured a disclaimer that kratom is addictive, with 54% stating that the product is not FDA approved. Only 5% of vendors utilized effective age verification through confirming age on delivery or use of a third party online database. Enforcement of state and locality bans on the vendor's part varied by location; 65% vendors did not sell to Indiana whereas only 27% prohibited sales to Rhode Island. Conclusions: The kratom internet vendor industry (KIV) was found to have low adherence to US state-level restrictions on the products’ purchase. There is a high prevalence of health claims featured on vendor webpages that are discouraged by the Food and Drug Administration. eng text Masters Paper Justin Trogdon Thesis advisor Creator Dmitriy Nikitin Department of Health Policy and Management Gillings School of Global Public Health MSPH Health Policy Management 2018-05 2018 University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Degree granting institution Objective: Examine the online industry for kratom (Mitragyna speciosa), a plant-based substance used by Americans as an opioid alternative, and provide context to the market amidst regulatory attempts by the Food and Drug Administration and numerous state legislatures. Methods: Using search results collected from the three most widely used search engines, 663 websites were identified selling kratom products to US consumers. The top 100 most visited online vendors were selected and the content of their website and social media profiles were coded for topics including location, payment and shipping options, age verification, health warnings and disclaimers, grassroots advocacy regarding upcoming state and federal regulations, and response to the recent kratom-linked Salmonella outbreak. Results: 25% of vendors made claims that kratom provided relief from opioid withdrawal. 81% of vendors featured a disclaimer that kratom is addictive, with 54% stating that the product is not FDA approved. Only 5% of vendors utilized effective age verification through confirming age on delivery or use of a third party online database. Enforcement of state and locality bans on the vendor's part varied by location; 65% vendors did not sell to Indiana whereas only 27% prohibited sales to Rhode Island. Conclusions: The kratom internet vendor industry (KIV) was found to have low adherence to US state-level restrictions on the products’ purchase. There is a high prevalence of health claims featured on vendor webpages that are discouraged by the Food and Drug Administration. eng text Masters Paper Justin Trogdon Thesis advisor Creator Dmitriy Nikitin Department of Health Policy and Management Gillings School of Global Public Health MSPH Health Policy Management 2018-05 2018 University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Degree granting institution Objective: Examine the online industry for kratom (Mitragyna speciosa), a plant-based substance used by Americans as an opioid alternative, and provide context to the market amidst regulatory attempts by the Food and Drug Administration and numerous state legislatures. Methods: Using search results collected from the three most widely used search engines, 663 websites were identified selling kratom products to US consumers. The top 100 most visited online vendors were selected and the content of their website and social media profiles were coded for topics including location, payment and shipping options, age verification, health warnings and disclaimers, grassroots advocacy regarding upcoming state and federal regulations, and response to the recent kratom-linked Salmonella outbreak. Results: 25% of vendors made claims that kratom provided relief from opioid withdrawal. 81% of vendors featured a disclaimer that kratom is addictive, with 54% stating that the product is not FDA approved. Only 5% of vendors utilized effective age verification through confirming age on delivery or use of a third party online database. Enforcement of state and locality bans on the vendor's part varied by location; 65% vendors did not sell to Indiana whereas only 27% prohibited sales to Rhode Island. Conclusions: The kratom internet vendor industry (KIV) was found to have low adherence to US state-level restrictions on the products’ purchase. There is a high prevalence of health claims featured on vendor webpages that are discouraged by the Food and Drug Administration. eng text Masters Paper Justin Trogdon Thesis advisor Creator Dmitriy Nikitin Department of Health Policy and Management Gillings School of Global Public Health MSPH Health Policy Management 2018-05 2018 University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Degree granting institution Objective: Examine the online industry for kratom (Mitragyna speciosa), a plant-based substance used by Americans as an opioid alternative, and provide context to the market amidst regulatory attempts by the Food and Drug Administration and numerous state legislatures. Methods: Using search results collected from the three most widely used search engines, 663 websites were identified selling kratom products to US consumers. The top 100 most visited online vendors were selected and the content of their website and social media profiles were coded for topics including location, payment and shipping options, age verification, health warnings and disclaimers, grassroots advocacy regarding upcoming state and federal regulations, and response to the recent kratom-linked Salmonella outbreak. Results: 25% of vendors made claims that kratom provided relief from opioid withdrawal. 81% of vendors featured a disclaimer that kratom is addictive, with 54% stating that the product is not FDA approved. Only 5% of vendors utilized effective age verification through confirming age on delivery or use of a third party online database. Enforcement of state and locality bans on the vendor's part varied by location; 65% vendors did not sell to Indiana whereas only 27% prohibited sales to Rhode Island. Conclusions: The kratom internet vendor industry (KIV) was found to have low adherence to US state-level restrictions on the products’ purchase. There is a high prevalence of health claims featured on vendor webpages that are discouraged by the Food and Drug Administration. eng text Masters Paper Justin Trogdon Thesis advisor 2020-05-04T00:00:00 Aggregate Work uuid:b20ba62e-1305-4cf0-a3d1-8e692b803c5e