As THC beverages face an uncertain regulatory future, beverage brands are exploring other ingredients that can deliver a noticeable mood-enhancing experience. Kava and kanna are gaining attention among product developers looking for alternatives that fit into the growing market for alcohol replacement beverages. Both ingredients are associated with mood and relaxation, but they are used for different occasions and effects.

Kava is generally associated with relaxation, unwinding, and social calm, while kanna is more often framed around mood lift, emotional ease, and a lighter social effect. For hemp beverage developers preparing for the potential November hemp ban, these botanicals have emerged as leading candidates because they may deliver a mood-altering experience that comes closest to a low-dose THC beverage. The question is, will consumers think it’s enough of a lift? Whether kava or kanna gains traction will depend on how consumers respond to the experience they deliver.

Different botanicals, different jobs

Kava comes from the South Pacific and has a long traditional history as a ceremonial and social beverage. Kanna, by contrast, is Sceletium tortuosum, a South African succulent that has gained attention in modern functional products for mood-forward applications.

Though both ingredients affect a person’s mood and relaxation, they work differently in the brain. Kava leans toward GABA and ion-channel activity, making it a better fit for calm and unwind occasions, while kanna is more closely tied to serotonin pathways and is often positioned for mood elevation and social ease.

A kava beverage may be marketed toward evening consumption, wind-down rituals, and the kind of “take the edge off” messaging that aligns with alcohol substitution. A kanna beverage may fit better into daytime use, social confidence, or “feel lighter” positioning, especially if a brand wants to avoid heavier sedative associations.

Formulation and Experience

For formulators, the ingredient choice also affects taste-masking, blend architecture, and the supporting botanicals used in the formula. Kava’s earthy, sometimes challenging flavor profile often requires more deliberate masking or a stronger sensory system, particularly in sparkling or flavored RTD formats. Kanna is slightly easier to formulate than kava. Working with botanical and functional ingredients in beverages requires strict quality control to maintain consistency for repeatable effects across batches.

Research suggests both kava and kanna can produce noticeable effects at certain doses, but the experience is highly dependent on extract quality, dosage, and product format. Rather than mimicking THC, these botanicals are better positioned as functional alternatives for relaxation, mood lift, or social ease.

Safety and Substantiation

Both ingredients deserve conservative handling from a safety and claims standpoint. Kanna has limited human data, and available sources note side effects such as headache, fatigue, drowsiness, and concentration issues, along with interaction concerns involving serotonergic drugs like SSRIs. Kava has its own caution profile, including ongoing attention to liver-related concerns and the need for careful messaging around dose and use occasion.

Brands should avoid drifting into drug-style claims. Statements about treating anxiety, insomnia, depression, or pain can move a product into dangerous regulatory territory if it is not an approved drug. The safest path is to stay within structure-function style language where permitted, and to ensure the product’s intended category is aligned with its actual regulatory status.

The Regulator’s Perspective

Regulation is where kava and kanna diverge most sharply for beverage developers. A recent legal commentary noted that the FDA has been more accepting of plain kava tea as a conventional food, but that adding carbonation, sweeteners, or other botanicals can change the analysis and raise food-additive questions. That means a “kava beverage” is not automatically straightforward just because kava itself has a long history of traditional use.

Kanna presents a different challenge. It is generally discussed in the market as a dietary supplement ingredient, but putting it into a conventional beverage raises GRAS or food-additive questions, especially if the finished product is sold as a food rather than a supplement. For brands in the hemp beverage space, novel botanicals can create additional compliance risk.

Finding the Right Fit for Consumers

For hemp beverage brands, the challenge isn’t finding another functional ingredient. The functional beverage aisle is already crowded with products promising energy, focus, sleep, hydration, and wellness. Whether kava or kanna becomes a mainstream alternative will depend on how consumers respond to the effects. While these botanicals may appeal to consumers seeking a subtle mood lift or a way to unwind, they are unlikely to satisfy those looking for the stronger effects associated with higher-dose THC beverages.