Last reviewed: August 30, 2026. Educational content for adults 21+. This is not medical or legal advice. Kiody does not sell concentrated 7-OH products.
Suggested page / content hub: Learning Center → Lab Testing & Product Quality
Secondary phrases: kratom COA specifications, kratom pass fail limits, kratom quality standards, kratom testing requirements, kratom release specifications
Suggested SEO title: Kratom Product Specifications: How COA Pass/Fail Limits Work
Suggested meta description: Learn how kratom component, in-process, finished-product, packaging and label specifications turn lab results into documented quality decisions.
Suggested URL slug: /learn/kratom-product-specifications/
The short answer
A certificate of analysis, or COA, reports results. A specification states what result, range, condition or attribute is required. You need both to make a defensible pass-or-fail decision.
Imagine that a COA reports:
- Mitragynine: 1.31%
- 7-OH: 0.008%
- Lead: 0.62 parts per million
- Salmonella: not detected in the tested portion
- Moisture: 8.4%
Those numbers and statements are data. They do not tell a reader whether the lot passes unless the product’s approved specifications identify the relevant units, methods, reporting rules and acceptance criteria. “Pass” cannot be reconstructed from a logo, a green check mark or a lab’s opinion alone.
A serious specification answers at least five questions:
- What is being evaluated? A raw botanical component, an in-process blend, a finished powder, capsules, packaging or a label?
- What attribute matters? Identity, purity, strength, composition, contamination, weight, package integrity or labeling?
- How is it evaluated? Which examination or analytical method, sample plan and reporting convention apply?
- What is acceptable? A minimum, maximum, range, absence requirement or descriptive standard?
- Who decides? Which qualified quality-control reviewer approves, rejects or investigates the lot?
Specifications make product claims testable. They also prevent a company from deciding what “good enough” means only after seeing the result.
What a specification is—and what it is not
A specification is a pre-established requirement used to judge material or an operation. It may be numerical, qualitative or both.
Examples include:
- Botanical identity must be consistent with authenticated Mitragyna speciosa leaf under the approved identity method.
- Salmonella must not be detected in the specified analytical portion under the named method.
- Net capsule fill must remain within an approved range using the defined sampling and calculation procedure.
- Finished packaging must use the approved container, closure, lot code and label version.
- A metal detector must detect and reject documented challenge pieces at defined operating conditions.
A specification is not:
- A marketing adjective such as “premium” or “super clean”;
- A result copied from one historically good lot;
- A laboratory reporting limit;
- A legal threshold automatically converted into a quality target;
- An after-the-fact limit selected so a result will pass;
- A COA template with no approved acceptance criteria; or
- A guarantee that every unit in a lot is identical.
FDA’s dietary-supplement current good manufacturing practice rule defines quality in terms of consistently meeting established specifications for identity, purity, strength, composition and contaminant limits, together with manufacturing, packaging, labeling and holding conditions that prevent adulteration. FDA also describes a scientifically valid method as one that is accurate, precise and specific for its intended purpose. FDA dietary-supplement CGMP compliance guide.
That framework is useful for quality literacy. It does not imply that FDA has approved kratom as a dietary supplement or approved a specific kratom product. FDA’s current position remains that kratom has not been lawfully marketed in the United States as a conventional food or dietary supplement. FDA and Kratom.
The six specification families
The word “specification” becomes clearer when divided by where it operates.
1. Component specifications
Components are the materials used to manufacture the product. For a pure-leaf powder, the botanical leaf or powder is a component. For capsules, components may include leaf powder and the capsule shell. For a flavored extract product, components may include extract, carrier, flavor and other ingredients.
Component specifications can address:
- Botanical identity;
- Plant part;
- Appearance or particle-size attributes;
- Microbiological contamination;
- Elemental contaminants;
- Pesticide residues where relevant;
- Moisture or water activity;
- Alkaloid composition;
- Residual solvents for extracts;
- Foreign material; and
- Packaging or transport condition at receipt.
Under 21 CFR §111.70, each dietary ingredient component requires an identity specification. Other component specifications must be established as needed for finished-product purity, strength and composition, together with limits on contamination that may adulterate or lead to adulteration of the finished lot. 21 CFR Part 111, Subpart E.
A supplier COA may support some attributes, but it does not transfer responsibility for deciding what the company accepts. Where reliance on a component supplier’s COA is permitted, the rule requires supplier qualification, confirmation of reliability, actual results and methods, periodic reconfirmation and quality review. A supplier’s “pass” is not automatically the purchaser’s “pass.”
2. In-process specifications
In-process specifications control important stages before the finished lot exists. Examples include:
- Blend time and uniformity evidence;
- Sifter identity and screen integrity;
- Target fill weight during encapsulation;
- Theoretical and actual yield ranges;
- Detector challenge results;
- Drying endpoint;
- pH or solids for a liquid process;
- Line-clearance completion; and
- Hold-time limits between steps.
The useful question is not whether every process variable has a specification. It is whether the company identified the points where control is necessary to ensure the finished product meets its approved requirements.
An in-process result can protect quality before a finished-product test would reveal a problem. For example, a capsule-weight check can identify drift quickly. Waiting for a finished composite assay may not show how many individual capsules were underfilled or overfilled during a short equipment upset.
3. Finished-product specifications
Finished-product specifications apply to the completed batch before distribution. They may cover:
- Identity;
- Purity;
- Strength or declared amount where applicable;
- Composition;
- Microbiological limits;
- Elemental contaminants;
- Alkaloid profile;
- Moisture-related properties;
- Physical form and appearance;
- Net contents; and
- Other attributes needed for the particular product.
The word “finished” matters. A raw leaf result does not automatically establish what is true after milling, blending, encapsulation or extraction. Likewise, a finished bulk powder result does not prove the correct label and package were applied.
4. Packaging specifications
Packaging that contacts product should be safe and suitable for its intended use and should not react with, absorb or otherwise affect product safety or quality. A packaging specification can identify:
- Container material and size;
- Closure and liner;
- Moisture or oxygen barrier requirements where justified;
- Tamper feature, if used;
- Desiccant type and count, if used;
- Induction-seal settings or inspection;
- Cleanliness and damage criteria;
- Supplier and component code; and
- Compatibility with the intended product and shelf-life study.
A passing chemistry COA cannot correct the wrong bottle or a missing liner.
5. Label specifications
The label specification identifies the approved artwork, text, warnings, net quantity, lot presentation and other controlled elements. It should prevent the correct product from receiving the wrong label.
For Kiody, a label review should also preserve accurate product-form distinctions. Pure-leaf capsules contain approximately 500 mg of leaf powder per capsule. They should not be described as extract capsules or converted into an unsupported “equivalent” amount. Kiody is 21+ and does not sell concentrated 7-OH.
6. Finished packaged-and-labeled specifications
The final release question is larger than “Did the powder pass?” It includes whether the specified container and label were used, the lot code is legible, the package is intact, the count or net quantity is correct and required examinations were completed.
21 CFR §111.70 separately addresses specifications for packaging and labeling of the finished unit. Section 111.75 requires at least visual examination of containers, closures and labels before use and examination of the finished packaged and labeled supplement. 21 CFR §111.75.
Anatomy of a useful written specification
A durable specification record should make the decision reproducible. A practical structure includes:
| Field | Why it matters |
|---|---|
| Specification ID and version | Shows which controlled rule applied |
| Material or product | Prevents use of a limit for the wrong matrix |
| Manufacturing stage | Distinguishes component, in-process and finished-product decisions |
| Attribute | States what is being controlled |
| Acceptance criterion | Defines the pass/fail rule |
| Units and denominator | Prevents ppm, mg/g, percent and per-serving confusion |
| Method | Links the decision to a suitable examination |
| Sample plan | Defines how the tested portion represents the lot |
| Reporting rule | Explains ND, less-than results, rounding and significant figures |
| Decision rule | Explains how uncertainty or a result near the limit is handled |
| Rationale | Records why the limit and method are appropriate |
| Source | Identifies law, guidance, customer requirement or internal standard |
| Effective date | Prevents retroactive application of a later version |
| Quality approval | Shows authorized review before use |
| Change history | Preserves what changed and why |
A line such as “Lead: pass” is not enough. A stronger controlled entry might identify the measured analyte, maximum in mg/kg, validated method, sample basis, reporting limit, treatment of results at the boundary and approval version.
Result, specification and legal threshold are different things
These three concepts are commonly collapsed.
The result
What the examination observed in the tested portion—for example, 0.42 mg/kg lead or “not detected in 25 g.”
The specification
The company’s approved acceptance criterion for the relevant product and stage—for example, “not more than X mg/kg under Method Y.”
The legal threshold
A limit or condition imposed by a statute, rule or order. It may use a different denominator, product definition or enforcement structure from an internal specification.
A good internal release limit may be more conservative than the legal maximum to account for variability, measurement uncertainty, rounding and time in distribution. Meeting an internal limit does not prove legal compliance in every jurisdiction. Meeting one jurisdiction’s threshold does not establish compliance elsewhere.
Why units and denominators decide the answer
Consider three possible 7-OH expressions:
- Percent of dry product weight;
- Milligrams per serving or unit; and
- Percent of total alkaloid composition.
They are not interchangeable.
Suppose a powder contains 1.5% total measured kratom alkaloids by weight, and 7-OH represents 1% of that alkaloid fraction.
1.5% × 1% = 0.015% 7-OH by product weight.
That equals 0.15 mg of 7-OH per gram of powder because 1% by weight equals 10 mg/g. In a 2 g labeled serving, the calculated amount would be 0.30 mg, assuming the percentage and serving basis are appropriate.
The same material can therefore be truthfully described as:
- 1% of total alkaloids;
- 0.015% of product weight;
- 0.15 mg/g; or
- 0.30 mg per 2 g.
Those figures look very different because the denominators differ. A specification must state which one controls.
Minimums, maximums, ranges and absence requirements
Minimum specification
Used when a result must be at or above a value. The method must be precise enough near the lower boundary. A minimum should not invite unsupported potency promises.
Maximum specification
Used when a contaminant, constituent or process result must not exceed a value. “Below the maximum” should account for rounding and the decision rule rather than treating every reported digit as exact.
Range specification
Used when both too little and too much can indicate a process failure. Capsule fill weight, yield and some composition attributes may use ranges.
Presence or absence specification
Often used for identity features, required components, pathogens or package elements. “Absent” must be tied to an examined sample and method. It does not mean mathematical proof of zero throughout every unit.
Descriptive specification
Used for attributes such as color, texture, odor, packaging condition or label appearance. Descriptive criteria need reference standards, controlled wording, adequate lighting or examination conditions and trained reviewers.
ND, LOD and LOQ are not acceptance criteria
ND, or not detected, means the method did not detect the analyte under its conditions. It does not mean absolute zero.
The limit of detection, or LOD, is associated with detecting the presence of an analyte. The limit of quantitation, or LOQ, is associated with reporting it quantitatively with suitable performance. Laboratories may use other terms such as reporting limit.
If a maximum specification is lower than the laboratory’s reporting capability, a report of “<LOQ” may not show the lot meets the limit. For example:
- Specification: not more than 0.10 mg/kg
- Laboratory LOQ: 0.25 mg/kg
- Report: <0.25 mg/kg
The true value could be below 0.10, between 0.10 and 0.25, or effectively zero. The method cannot resolve the release question at the required limit. The answer is not to relabel “<0.25” as “pass”; it is to use a suitable method or revise the specification only with a documented scientific and legal basis.
Rounding, significant figures and boundary results
Suppose the maximum is 0.050% and the laboratory reports 0.0496%. Does it pass?
The answer depends on the controlled decision rule. If the specification is compared to unrounded data, the result is below the limit. If the approved rule compares values rounded to three decimal places, both may display as 0.050%. Measurement uncertainty may also affect a conformity statement when a result is close to a boundary.
The rule should be decided before results arrive. It should specify:
- Whether comparison uses raw or rounded data;
- Number of decimal places or significant figures;
- How “equal to the limit” is treated;
- Whether analytical uncertainty is incorporated;
- What happens when duplicate preparations differ;
- When confirmation is permitted; and
- Who approves the conclusion.
Changing the rounding convention after seeing a near-limit result is a form of result-driven decision-making.
Method suitability belongs inside the decision
An acceptance limit without a suitable method is incomplete. The method needs appropriate:
- Specificity for the analyte and matrix;
- Accuracy near the limit;
- Precision near the limit;
- Working range;
- Recovery;
- Detection and quantitation capability;
- Reference materials;
- Controls and system-suitability criteria; and
- Defined sample preparation.
A method validated for plain leaf powder should not automatically be assumed suitable for gummies, beverages, concentrated extracts or products with complex carriers. Matrix interference can change recovery, chromatographic separation or detection.
FDA’s compliance guide describes a scientifically valid method as one that consistently does what it is intended to do. That definition focuses attention on intended purpose: identity confirmation, trace contaminant detection and near-threshold alkaloid quantitation are different purposes.
Sampling belongs in the specification system
A precise method can produce a precise answer about a poor sample. Specifications should cross-reference an approved sampling plan that defines the lot, selection process, number of increments, composite or individual testing, sample amount, container coverage and chain of custody.
Sparse contamination is especially challenging. One small analytical portion may miss a localized object or microorganism. Blend uniformity and capsule fill can vary across time. A specification system should explain why the sample and examination provide enough assurance for the decision being made.
This does not mean every unit is tested. It means the company has a documented basis for the chosen evidence and understands what that evidence cannot prove.
How specifications connect to manufacturing records
The master manufacturing record is the approved plan. Under 21 CFR §111.210, it includes specifications at necessary process stages, sampling procedures, cross-references to tests, verification actions, special precautions and corrective-action plans. 21 CFR §111.210.
The batch production record is the history of what happened in one actual batch. Under 21 CFR §111.260, it includes monitoring results, tests and examinations, documentation that finished specifications were met, and quality-control release or rejection. 21 CFR §111.260.
This creates a traceable chain:
Approved specification → approved method and sampling plan → actual result → deviation review if needed → quality disposition → batch release record.
If one link is missing, a public COA may look complete while the underlying decision remains unclear.
What happens when a specification is missed
Failure is not resolved by hiding the result, averaging it with a passing number or repeatedly testing until a pass appears.
21 CFR §111.77 requires rejection of affected components, supplements, packages or labels when specified requirements are not met unless quality control approves a permitted treatment, adjustment or reprocessing that will ensure quality. Identity failures require rejection of the component. 21 CFR §111.77.
Section 111.113 requires a documented material review and disposition decision when a specification is not met, a batch deviates from the master record, an unanticipated occurrence may lead to adulteration, calibration suggests a possible quality failure, or product is returned. 21 CFR §111.113.
A complete response asks:
- Was the original result scientifically valid?
- Was the sample representative and properly handled?
- Did laboratory or manufacturing error occur?
- What other lots or time periods may be affected?
- Does the result reveal a supplier, equipment or process trend?
- Is reprocessing scientifically and legally appropriate?
- What is the documented lot disposition?
- What corrective and preventive action follows?
A passing retest may contribute evidence. It does not automatically erase the original failure.
Five worked specification reviews
Scenario 1: “Microbiology passed” with no limits
The COA lists aerobic plate count, yeast and mold, Salmonella and E. coli as “pass,” but shows no results or acceptance criteria.
Review: Request actual results, units, analytical portions, methods, reporting limits and approved specifications. Pathogen absence and indicator-organism counts answer different questions. A green check mark cannot replace the evidence.
Scenario 2: Lead result below the lab’s internal flag
The laboratory flags lead as passing because it is below the lab’s generic customer default. Kiody’s approved product-specific maximum is lower.
Review: Compare the actual result with Kiody’s controlled specification. The laboratory’s flag is not the brand’s release decision. Quality must use the applicable product, serving basis, method and legal context.
Scenario 3: Capsule average passes, individual units drift
Twenty capsules average approximately 500 mg of leaf powder, but the beginning and end of the run show large individual variation.
Review: An average cannot prove every in-process range was met. Review individual weights, sampling times, equipment settings and the approved acceptance rule. The issue may require a time-window investigation even when the overall mean looks correct.
Scenario 4: Near-threshold 7-OH result
A finished-product 7-OH result is close to an applicable internal or legal maximum. The COA rounds to fewer digits than the instrument data.
Review: Confirm denominator, dry-weight basis if relevant, unit conversion, sample preparation, measurement uncertainty, raw-data comparison and pre-approved rounding rule. Place the lot on hold while the decision is documented. Do not switch denominators or rounding rules after seeing the number.
Scenario 5: Correct powder, wrong label
The chemical and microbiology panels pass, but the bottle received a label for a different variety and lot presentation.
Review: The lot fails the finished packaged-and-labeled specification. Chemistry cannot correct a label mismatch. Control affected units, reconcile labels, investigate line clearance and document disposition.
Twenty specification warning signs
- “Pass” appears without an acceptance criterion.
- A result is reported without units.
- Percent is used without naming the denominator.
- Per-serving calculations omit the serving amount.
- The method’s LOQ is above the specification.
- One specification is used for powder, liquid, gummy and extract matrices without justification.
- Supplier limits replace the brand’s approved requirements.
- A legal maximum is treated as the ideal production target.
- The limit was approved after the result was known.
- Rounding changes from lot to lot.
- “ND” is described as absolute zero.
- “Absent” omits the tested analytical portion.
- A component result is presented as a finished-product result.
- An average hides individual-unit failures.
- Retesting continues until a passing result appears.
- Failing results disappear from the final report without an investigation trail.
- Packaging and label specifications are excluded from release.
- No version or effective date appears on the specification.
- Quality approval is missing or retrospective.
- The company calls voluntary testing “FDA approved.”
A proposed 32-field Kiody specification record
Kiody could use the following review structure for each controlled attribute:
- Specification ID;
- Version;
- Effective date;
- Superseded version;
- Product or material name;
- Product form;
- Manufacturing stage;
- Component or finished-lot code;
- Attribute;
- Acceptance criterion;
- Minimum, maximum, range or qualitative type;
- Units;
- Denominator;
- Dry-, wet- or as-is basis;
- Method identifier and version;
- Laboratory or examination location;
- Method suitability status for the matrix;
- Sampling-plan identifier;
- Required sample amount;
- Number and location of increments;
- Composite or individual testing rule;
- LOD;
- LOQ or reporting limit;
- Rounding rule;
- Significant figures;
- Measurement-uncertainty decision rule;
- Replicate or confirmation rule;
- Corrective-action plan;
- Scientific rationale;
- Legal or customer source, if applicable;
- Quality approver and date; and
- Change history and reason.
This is a proposed transparency and control framework, not a representation that every field must appear on a public-facing COA. Controlled specifications can contain proprietary methods or supplier information. The public goal is accurate, lot-specific communication—not publication of every internal record.
Product-form examples
Leaf powder
Specifications can address botanical identity, plant part, microorganisms, elemental contaminants, pesticides where relevant, moisture-related attributes, foreign material, particle size and alkaloid composition. Appearance alone is not identity.
Pure-leaf capsules
Specifications should cover the incoming powder, capsule shell, in-process fill, finished composition, count, package and label. Kiody capsules contain approximately 500 mg of pure leaf powder per capsule. That statement should be supported by defined manufacturing and verification controls rather than converted into an extract-equivalence claim.
Extracts
Extract specifications may add solvent residues, carrier composition, extraction-ratio documentation, solids, concentration, matrix-specific alkaloid methods and package compatibility. A “10:1” ratio does not replace measured composition.
Beverages and gummies
These formats require specifications for added ingredients, serving uniformity, water activity or microbiology where relevant, packaging and the actual matrix used for testing. A powder method may not be transferable.
Enhanced or concentrated products
These require especially careful composition and legal review. Physical cleanliness or accurate labeling does not make a prohibited product lawful. Kiody does not sell concentrated 7-OH.
Current federal 7-OH and derivative status
As of August 30, 2026, the proposed federal 7-OH threshold remains a proposal—not a final scheduling rule. HHS extended the comment deadline to September 10, 2026. A company may use the proposal for scenario planning, but it should not label the proposed threshold as current federal law. HHS extension notice, 91 FR 55104.
A different DEA order is already effective. Mitragynine pseudoindoxyl, MGM-15 and MGM-16 entered Schedule I on August 26, 2026. The temporary order is effective until August 26, 2028 unless extended or made permanent through further federal action. It imposes Schedule I controls on manufacture, distribution, import, export, research, chemical analysis and possession of the three substances. DEA temporary scheduling order, 91 FR 54948.
Specification implications include:
- A company cannot use an internal “acceptable” limit to override Schedule I status.
- A specification should distinguish intentionally added or concentrated derivatives from ordinary botanical product evaluation.
- State limits may use different denominators and product definitions.
- A federal proposal should be version-controlled separately from current law.
- Legal review and quality release are related but distinct decisions.
Questions customers can ask
- Does the COA show actual results or only pass/fail marks?
- Are units and denominators stated?
- Is the tested lot the same lot shown on the package?
- Does the method fit the product form?
- Are reporting limits low enough to evaluate the claimed limit?
- Does “not detected” identify the method and analytical portion?
- Are raw component results being represented as finished-product results?
- Are packaging and label checks part of final release?
- Who reviews unexpected or failing results?
- Are legal thresholds distinguished from internal quality targets?
A company may reasonably keep detailed specifications confidential. It should still be able to explain what its public “pass” means without inventing certainty or implying government approval.
Frequently asked questions
Is a COA the same as a product specification?
No. A COA reports results or attributes for a sample or lot. A specification is the pre-approved rule used to judge those results.
Who sets kratom specifications?
Manufacturers and responsible parties establish product-specific requirements based on applicable law, intended product attributes, process knowledge, scientific evidence and risk. A laboratory may help develop or evaluate methods, but its default limits do not automatically become the brand’s specifications.
Does FDA publish one complete kratom specification?
No. Kiody should not imply that FDA has issued or approved one universal kratom release standard. Applicable federal, state and local rules, general manufacturing requirements and product-specific risk decisions must be evaluated separately.
Can an internal specification be stricter than the law?
Yes. Internal action or release limits may be more conservative to address variability and decision risk. They cannot be less protective than an applicable legal requirement.
Does meeting a legal limit mean a product is high quality?
Not by itself. One legal threshold addresses one issue. Quality also depends on identity, contamination controls, composition, manufacturing, packaging, labeling, traceability and lot disposition.
What does “within specification” mean?
It means the result met the applicable approved criterion under the defined method, sampling plan, reporting and decision rules. It should not be used as a vague synonym for “safe” or “approved.”
Is ND automatically a pass?
Only if the method’s detection or reporting capability is suitable for the specification and the approved rule permits that conclusion. ND does not mean zero.
What if the result equals the maximum?
The controlled decision rule should say how equality, rounding and uncertainty are handled. The rule should not be created after the result is known.
Can a company average a failure with a pass?
Not automatically. Averaging can hide variability and may be scientifically inappropriate. The original result, sampling design, replicate purpose and investigation must be evaluated under an approved procedure.
Can a passing retest erase a failure?
No. A retest can add evidence, but the initial result remains part of the investigation unless a documented assignable laboratory error invalidates it.
Why are component and finished-product limits different?
Manufacturing can dilute, concentrate, combine or introduce attributes. A component specification helps control inputs; a finished-product specification evaluates the output.
Does a capsule average prove each capsule meets requirements?
No. An average can conceal individual variation. The sampling plan and individual-unit or in-process criteria determine what the evidence supports.
Does a packaging failure matter when the lab panel passes?
Yes. Wrong, damaged or unsuitable packaging can make the finished product fail even when chemistry and microbiology results meet their limits.
Are legal 7-OH thresholds always expressed the same way?
No. Different rules and proposals can use percent of product weight, milligrams per unit or percent of total alkaloids. The denominator must be identified.
Is the federal 7-OH threshold final?
No, as of August 30, 2026. The threshold remains proposed, and the HHS comment period runs through September 10, 2026.
Are MP, MGM-15 and MGM-16 merely proposed for scheduling?
No. DEA’s separate temporary order placed mitragynine pseudoindoxyl, MGM-15 and MGM-16 in Schedule I effective August 26, 2026.
Does Kiody sell concentrated 7-OH?
No. Kiody is 21+ and does not sell concentrated 7-OH. Its pure-leaf capsules contain approximately 500 mg of leaf powder per capsule and should not be confused with extract or enhanced-product capsules.
Takeaway
The most important line on a COA may be the line that is not printed: the approved rule used to decide whether the result is acceptable.
Strong product specifications are written before testing, matched to the product and manufacturing stage, linked to appropriate methods and sampling, explicit about units and denominators, and controlled by quality personnel. They turn test numbers into consistent decisions while preserving the difference between quality evidence, legal compliance and marketing language.
For customers, that means “lab tested” is a starting point. The better question is: Tested against what, by which method, on which lot, and under what decision rule?
Primary sources and editorial references
- Electronic Code of Federal Regulations, 21 CFR Part 111, Subpart E, especially §§111.55, 111.70, 111.75 and 111.77.
- Electronic Code of Federal Regulations, 21 CFR §111.113, material review and disposition.
- Electronic Code of Federal Regulations, 21 CFR §111.210, master manufacturing records.
- Electronic Code of Federal Regulations, 21 CFR §111.260, batch production records.
- FDA, Small Entity Compliance Guide: Dietary Supplement CGMP.
- FDA, FDA and Kratom, accessed August 30, 2026.
- HHS, 7-OH Threshold RFI Comment-Period Extension, 91 FR 55104, August 26, 2026.
- DEA, Temporary Placement of Mitragynine Pseudoindoxyl, MGM-15 and MGM-16 in Schedule I, 91 FR 54948, effective August 26, 2026.