hissy tapes

The Curious Connection Between Mindbloom, Elon Musk and DOGE

Many of you are familiar with my sobriety via the rooms of AA. Closing in on six years, one day at a time. But many more probably don't realize I'm also a proponent of psychedelic health.

Yes, I'm an advocate of prescribing select psychedelic medications — examples: psilocybin (mushrooms), ketamine (K) and MDMA (ecstasy) — to treat a wide range of mental-health disorders in a controlled clinical setting under the supervision of a physician and therapist.

(And no, this doesn't conflict with my understanding of AA guidance and suggestion; being abstinent from alcohol isn't mutually exclusive from being conceptually OK with doctor-prescribed drugs such as MDMA to treat post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). And double-no, I'm not "California sober" nor currently using psychedelics, recreationally or therapeutically.)

The list of mental-health issues these psychedelic meds can treat is quite extensive, but generally includes depression, PTSD, anxiety, obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), eating disorders and alcohol/substance addiction.

Admittedly, I have, uhhh, dabbled with several of these drugs in the past. But my path and reasoning might not be what you assume. I was genuinely fascinated — enlightened from multiple psychology and pharmacology courses in high school and college — by the possibility of psychedelics playing a role in achieving higher states of consciousness and spirituality, unlocking our true human potential, and healing past traumas.

(To be honest and transparent, my own experiences with these drugs were exclusively positive and hopeful. And yes, I was also very lucky to have escaped any of the potential negatives these experiments can cause.)

Yet my interest in psychedelic health has followed me into sobriety; I keep updated about the latest legal challenges, clinical-trial results and commercialization advancements. I'm pretty low-key about it — occasionally posting on social channels — and follow several thought-leaders and companies in that space.

And that leads me to Mindbloom. I've been tracking the U.S. telehealth company — considered the market leader in ketamine-assisted therapy — and its CEO Dylan Beynon on LinkedIn for the past several years. In general, telehealth is where the healthcare industry is heading, providing routine care and maintenance visits while cutting costs. It's a bullish direction and a theoretical win-win.

From my lofty assessment, Dylan's posts have traditionally been focused on non-controversial advocacy for psychedelic health and his company. Pretty much status-quo. Until a few days ago.

On February 20, he re-posted a podcast on LinkedIn from Truemed — a system that electronically allows patients to pay for healthcare services using HSA/FSA funds — in which he inserted his own editorial comments. (Truemed's original post teased "exercise and quality sleep outperform selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors [SSRIs] for depression" for its accompanying video podcast.)

Dylan included a longer list of therapies that also help improve mental health in his re-post comment. However, talk-therapy wasn't among the modalities listed. I then commented, "Curious … Therapy not on your list?" Dylan soon replied, writing talk-therapy was no more effective than "sugar pills" and SSRIs are equally ineffective.

(Full-disclosure: I'm currently taking an SSRI — escitalopram (generic for Lexapro) — and engaged in 1:1 talk-therapy as well as group therapy via AA.)

OK, a differing POV. That's why we engage, right? No issues there. But then another commenter chimed in, challenging Dylan to post the clinical studies he was referencing to (he kinda did, yet the studies didn't align with what he originally posted). Then the following day, Dylan added a subsequent comment further railing against talk-therapy and SSRIs — including the bro-culture language "inconvenient truth" and "time to wake up." And back-and-forth it went.

Then news broke on February 21 about Elon Musk's alleged ketamine-soaked "performance" at CPAC the previous night, complete with chainsaw swinging and wearing-my-sunglasses-at-night schtick. Musk has gone on-record multiple times discussing his therapeutic — and presumed legal — use of ketamine to treat depression. Cool-cool.

As I was digging through media reports about his self-proclaimed appetite for ketamine, I came across recent articles from ProPublica, The Washington Post and Newsweek profiling Musk’s DOGE team — including names and descriptions of key personnel. All three stories listed an employee with a particularly curious connection to psychedelic therapy — Alexandra T. Beynon, a former software engineer at Mindbloom and current wife of its CEO Dylan Beynon.

Hmmm …

Yep, Dylan's wife, Alexandra, is one of the DOGE stooges who are waging Blitzkrieg-bop against our federal government — along with a scorched-Earth policy to destroy them all and ask questions never. Pillow-talk aside, WTF are those two Mindblooms really up to?

I do have an idea of how I imagine this all began and then played out. As noted, Musk hasn't been shy his ketamine therapy; he's a longtime user and true-believer. Mindbloom, based in Austin, opened its virtual doors in 2018 and began a slow-but-steady ascent to market dominance in remote ketamine-assisted therapy.

My guess is somewhere along this journey, Dylan crossed paths with richest-human-on-the-planet Musk. Possibly a meeting of minds ensued; Dylan's company was a ketamine-prescriber and Musk was a depression patient in search of treatment. A deal was struck and a friendship grew. Mindbloom was now Musk's legal-ketamine supplier?

How Dylan's wife Alexandra was exactly dropped in this mix is wholly unclear; she previously held an IT role at Mindbloom until several weeks ago. Presumably, she also met Musk during this period and was on a shortlist of candidates for the DOGE team due to this relationship. I'm not so interested in the nuts-and-bolts of how this transaction happened, but much more in the "Why?"

Here we have Mindbloom — a seemingly above-board company — with a clinical mission to help those with mental-health disorders plus altruistic overtones. Sure, the psychedelic-health space is considered novel, controversial and pretty much unregulated; to-date, ketamine is the only FDA-approved medication in this class to legally treat depression (psilocybin and MDMA are still mired in clinical trials).

For me, the DOGE connection is troubling to say the least. Without getting into a long discourse about Musk and his merry band of nihilistic demons — that's 2,500 words for another day — Mindbloom seems to be inserting itself via Alexandra into deep-state MAGA politics for corporate and/or deregulatory gain.

Yeah — nothing particularly shocking there. And I'm far-far from being naïve about how this shit works behind closed doors. Yet the inherent conflicts run deep — which, not surprising, is the DOGE modus operandi — and no one is even looking because "flood the zone." But a ketamine-assisted therapy company having its tentacles on Musk's Team DOGE and its wrecking-ball destruction ain't good for anyone but themselves. ### Image credits: Forbes, LinkedIn, Reuters, DOGE, ProPublica

Disclaimer: all content expressed is solely my opinion and all assertions presented are alleged actions and/or working theories as protected under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. (copyright 2025 — daniel fuller)

I've been forever trying to get inside the MAGA- and/or Country Club GOP-mind when it comes voting for #Trump against all rational reason and self-interest. Well, moment of clarity, it begins and ends with greed (plus a dose of spite when they double-down after realizing cruelty is the real point).

Turns out, the No. 5 slot on the list of Seven Deadly Sins is ground-zero for most of the immoral, unethical and criminal behavior throughout human history. Just ask your angry-uncle Bible-thumper.

Greed is what enables MAGAs and so-called "moderate Republicans" to turn on their own family and friends, agree to take away the liberties and freedoms of others, endorse abuse of and violence against immigrants (legal or illegal), agree to imprison and/or execute fellow citizens for not aligning with Trump's fascist-dictatorship, and then ultimately give up their own freedoms and personal liberties because dictators always turn on those who put them in power — always.

(And yes, authoritarianism is what we're ultimately voting for — or against — in 2024.)

For these folks, money is their God and consumerism is their life. Whether the working-poor or gated-community dweller, their only mission is obtaining wealth at all costs. It's not about survival or paying the bills; they believe they are entitled to the riches of the world simply because they are white (and mostly male). Minimal work — maximum payout. (What they used to call "easy living.")

And what windfall does it take for someone to turn on their fellow citizens and subsequently give up their own freedoms? Surprisingly, just pennies. I'll never understand someone who’ll liquidate their soul for the goal of fattening their wallet.

But not only is greed a deadly sin, it also makes its practitioners consummate suckers and easy marks. The grabbing hands grab all they can — until someone grabs it from them.

This all reminds me of Trading Places: Randolph and Mortimer Duke socially engineer the downfall of Louis Winthorpe III and then the upward mobility of Billy Ray Valentine — all for a bet of one dollar … These $1-bets are Trump voters.

And I haven't even mentioned Project 2025 yet — the Heritage Foundation's guide for Trump's potential second-term of greed and grift. This 920-page "mandate" reads like Hitler's obsessive-compulsive playbook for 1930s-Germany.

I get the feeling most Trump voters don't even realize what they're signing up for, much less taken the time to read this step-by-step plan on how to convert our democracy to a fascist-theocracy. Nor do they seem to care as long they think it benefits them now (it doesn't and won't). Ignorance is piss.

(And why is it up to us libtards to bring this to their attention?)

If you're voting Trump, I challenge you to ask yourself … Why? Do you really understand the implications of Trump's plan to destroy our democracy?

Are you comfortable inflicting pain on loved ones and family? If so … Why? Are you cool with your family, neighbors and co-workers who don’t support Trump being imprisoned indefinitely and/or executed?

Are you OK with giving up your personal liberties just for a few extra pennies you don't need — nor will ever receive? Are you good with brutal violence just so your party "wins?" And last but certainly not least, do you want to be told what God to pray to by the government?

Don't believe me? Or think these prompts are hyperbole or subterfuge? Fine. Just download Project 2025's Mandate for Leadership. Then open to any random section and read for five minutes.

From the hiring of all positions within the federal government based on individual loyalty to Trump, "punishing" opposing officials at all levels of government and consolidating power to the executive branch alone — it's all there in disturbing detail, typeset in 10.5 pt. Chronicle Text.

But a final query. If you answered "yes" to any or all of those questions:

For me, comedy — especially stand-up — is probably the purest form of human expression (and the First Amendment). A single person on a stage connecting to an audience.

A comic's topical range should be without restrictions or limits. I believe we all relate by making light of our differences; by doing so, we realize we're really all the same. And my reaction to controversial or offensive content is not to censor or cancel it. Nope. Never. Rather, it's to ask this simple question: Why?

We live in an fuckery-rich era with too many deserving targets to count; Trumpism, politicians, corporations, Trumpism, racism, healthcare inequities, Trumpism, cults, cartels, greed, materialism, consumerism, pop culture, Trumpism, social media and tech to name just a few.

But your "choice" as a comedian is attacking the transgender community, a historically marginalized group just now coming to grips with openly being their authentic selves ... Why?

How is someone's humanity so fucked they continue to double-down on a group who have been beaten down and ridiculed for decades? (And who's laughing anyway?) “Let's see ... I can't denigrate women, Blacks, Asians, Irish, immigrants, Hispanics, lesbians, gays, cancer patients or the mentally disabled. Who's left? Ohhhh ... Those transgender folks.” Comedy gold? Fuck off.

And from a creative standpoint, it’s a full-on cheat. Cop-out. Short cut. And a tell — you're bereft of ideas, buddy. Hatred masquerading as comedy. Ricky Gervais' new Netflix special and Dave Chappelle's recent transphobic screed opening for John Mulaney in Columbus, Ohio are just the latest examples.

As Americans, we’re a spiteful bunch. Despite having a standard of living that far exceeds requirements — and all the freedoms that go along with it — we don't seem to like it when a fellow citizen isn't forced to jump through the same hurdles like (maybe) we were.

While it's true the only thing we seem to like more than failure is a comeback story, we also love to see others struggle. In fact, it’s become a national pastime — the ultimate sport; packaged and streamed as entertainment.

Which brings me to student loans. Thankfully, I never had to take loans out for college during the early-'90s when I was a student. As the first-child, my parents saved for my tuition, which was paid in full without a bank note. It was certainly way more feasible to do this 30 years ago, before tuition skyrocketed exponentially and banks flexed their considerable marketing power to sell $150,000 loans to 18-year-olds.

However, I do have a personal window into student loans as my ex-wife owed heavily for her education (undergraduate and graduate). In her case, the undergraduate loans were taken prior to our relationship and graduate after we were married. The loans were eventually consolidated into one lump sum and then sold and re-sold a half-dozen times to different banks just like mortgages are.

The interest rates were criminal and fees associated with the constantly (purposely?) shifting payment schedule were predatory. And with all the resales — who were you paying anyway? While I really don't know shit about the banking industry, I don't think these practices would be allowed — much less tolerated — for any other type of loan (small business, mortgage, auto, etc.).

I mean, can you imagine a pimply teen walking into Wells Fargo and asking for a $200,000 loan to open a vape shop? And then securing one — sight unseen — without any further scrutiny or safeguards in place for the high-risk nature of the loan? Didn't think so.

Many — most? — of these student loans were made in bad faith by banking institutions who were all too eager to exploit these young, naive consumers who were simply trying to afford themselves the education we told them was required as a functioning adult in American society.

Fox News host and mean-spirited brand Laura Ingraham recently weighed in on the issue of student loans and received a shit-ton of well-earned ridicule for her unique, ummm, insights. “My mom worked as a waitress until she was 73 to help pay for our college, Even helped with loan repayment. Loan forgiveness just another insult to those who play by the rules,” lectured Ingraham.

Play by the rules? By forcing her own mother to work past retirement to pay off her loans, Ingraham simply paid this backwards by exploiting her own family. And did it ever occur to Ingraham that maybe — maybe? — the tuition and subsequent loan that would require your geriatric mother to work during her twilight years to pay it off was ... Morally wrong to begin with?

For the past year, I've watched a nearly endless stream of memes in my social media feeds — mainly posted by those who should know better — attacking those who either seek forgiveness for those exploitive loans or those who support this. The moronic construct is usually something along the lines of “You took a loan — pay it fuckin' back!” (It’s also worthy to note most of these memes personally attack the students — not the greedy institutions who made the unsavory loans to begin with. Sound familiar?)

A recent meme even juxtaposed paying off the insurmountable debt of cancer treatment — a societal sin unto itself — as "superior" to having student loans without a hint of irony or disgust. (Hint: No one should go into debt for either; and they're not in competition). Now we're positioning different segments of loan-holders against each other? Talk about moral bankruptcy.

Why do some see improving the lives of others as some “unfair” advantage? Must everyone struggle as the did (or want us to believe they did)? Why do you have to personally benefit before helping others? And don't we have a moral obligation to want a better world for future generations as was afforded to us?

These are the questions we should be all asking.

In 1997, I was paid roughly $300 for this cover story which ran in the Orlando Weekly. It was their going-rate — and pretty damn decent for an alt-weekly in any city at the time (much less Orlando).

25 years later, I'm again writing about Michael Donaldson (Q-Burns Abstract Message) for an upcoming issue. About the same 2,000-word length. Pay-rate in 2022? $50 (or 16.6% of what I was originally paid a quarter-century ago).

No complaints whatsoever, though. In fact, I'm quite-quite happy the Orlando Weekly is still publishing and even re-hired staff back after the sudden downsizing of 13 employees during the onset of COVID in March 2020.

The “copywriter versus content writer” debate seems to have resurfaced yet again on social media. Just Google it — there’s a shit-ton of blog stories detailing the supposed differences between the two along with the subsequent reposts that go along with it. (In fact, read one on LinkedIn last night.)

My first writing job with a variation of this title — content producer — was when I was hired by now-defunct Citysearch.com in 1999 for the Orlando office. Since this was a digital-only channel (website), I took “content” as tech-bro language for “copy” and really didn't think much about it. That is, until content was in the title of my next writing job a few years later.

But despite all the computations, I was still writing copy, 24/7. Long-form. Short-form. Consumer and B2B audiences. Journalistic or conversational in tone. Traditional collateral. Broadcast. Video. Out of home. And of course — anything and everything digital (websites, blogs, social, landing pages, white-paper downloads, email, texts, banner, display). 

But about that debate. It's bullshit. Always has been. And such 20th-century thinking. See, writer’s write. That's what we do. Doesn’t matter the channel, length or intent — it’s all writing. Letters, words and language to communicate a message or simply tell a story. Period. Hard-stop.

Thanks to friend Toni Foster for scanning and creating PDFs of the Rolling Stone story covering Orlando's underground rave-scene (August 27, 1997 issue). Featured here is the second full page; the story shares layout space throughout with an ongoing — and super annoying — sidebar of different electronic-music styles. Ugh.

I remember running out and buying this issue when it was first published; it was a BIG deal and something everyone was anticipating. Incidentally, I had written an initial draft covering similar territory for now-defunct Option magazine (a national music-monthly based in Santa Monica.) However, while the story was in its editing stage, Option shuttered its doors for good. Double ugh.

This sponsored post appeared in my Facebook feed over the weekend. While demeaning language towards those addicted to drugs or alcohol is indeed part of everyday conversation, it now looks like corporate America is in on the take and trying to monetize it.

How many times have you heard someone casually say “what a bunch of drunks” to a group of friends who overindulged the previous night? Use “alcoholic” as a derogatory synonym for lazy or worthless? Yell “alcohol abuse!” when someone spills their drink at a club? Or how about the oft-repeated gem that “queso is as addictive as crack" at an office lunch?

Would you make similar-toned comments towards women? Or the LGBTQ+ community? Or Black Americans? Or a cancer survivor? Yeah, didn't think so. Words count. And language towards #addiction shouldn't be any different.

As a copywriter, creative concepts inform most of what I write these days. Same with my ambient-drone music — the conceptual usually comes before the chords or melodies. In true Brian Eno-fashion, I tend to create with additional elements pulling forward from a centralized "idea."

In Every Dream Home a Heartache also spins from a concept — VHS-dubbed soap-opera episodes uploaded to early YouTube; then sampled and embedded into drifting-yet-melodic soundscapes. The album is a collaboration between UK ambient-artist Romance and Dean Hurley. The latter is a frequent and long-time musical partner with director David Lynch since the early-’00s. (And truth be told, that alone peaked my interest.)

Though seemingly named after the electronic dirge on Roxy Music's For Your Pleasure (1973) — and also featured as a self-titled track — the album's connection between the two remains fuzzy. Nevertheless, none of this really matters once "play" is pressed.

The soap-opera samples are (thankfully) used sparingly; only setting an emotional tone or punctuating a musical phrase or swell. I didn't recognize any dialogue — though my only real exposure to soaps was during a brief period in the early-'90s when I watched The Young and The Restless (Y&R).

Instead, the tracks focus on gauzy drones, sub-bass, hazy chord-progressions — along with warbly synth and piano melodies. Fittingly, these lo-fi streams do indeed approximate the melodramatic tension and romantic heartbreak you find throughout the Lynchland-oeuvre.

Read the pithy ALL-CAPS screen-grab (photo) — then watch this video. "IDENTIFY" with anything? This recruitment campaign was recently launched — via Facebook and YouTube — by the Brevard County Sheriff's Office (Florida, naturally).  

I'm a word-man by vocation. Writing has paid my rent — eventually, mortgage — for the past 28 years. Words count — and word-choice counts even more. Sheriff Wayne Ivey‘s decision to use "identify" to frame this campaign was purposeful; he’s ridiculing and/or mocking those who identify with a gender different than the one assigned at birth.

And Sheriff Ivey knows this damn well. He also knows this sows dissent among his conservative supporters and the transgender community (not his first shot in the Culture Wars). At first glance, it's simply childish — making fun of others to pull yourself up. Typical coward-bully behavior, right? Certainly. But it points to something far more disturbing and ugly; he equates choosing to be employed as a police officer and a person's gender identity/expression as one in the same — equal "choices." But don't take my word for it — take his.

This is an actual comment Sheriff Ivey authored on the Brevard County Sheriff's Office Facebook page in response to push-back of his “identify" recruitment campaign (SIC ad-nauseam):

I hate to disappoint you, but the last time I checked, the word “Identify” wasn’t exclusively assigned and only allowed to be used by one segment of society!! I mean did I miss something, where there is a law out there that I am not aware of that says “members of our agency can’t be proud to “identify” as cops?”

The fact that we are proud to “identify” as cops shouldn’t hurt your feelings or anyone else’s for that matter, well except for those we “identify” as suspects in crimes that we then take to jail!!

If you can find it, please let me know what part of the United States Constitution prohibits us from being allowed to “identify” as cops, but allows everyone else in the country to be proud of their profession and lives!! I’ll be waiting, but until then perhaps you should just be thankful that the brave men and women of our agency, like the ones in the video, are out there keeping evil away from your door while you sleep soundly in your bed at night!!

Sheriff Wayne Ivey

Yep — Sheriff Ivey fancies himself a "Constitutionalist,” albeit one with a badge. Bless his heart. But what this often means in practical terms is he conducts himself as he pleases in the guise of fighting crime (and apparently, "protecting" the Constitution?).

Funny how this "zero-tolerance" policy has only resulted in middling stats — Brevard's crime-index only equals the state's aggregate-average for all counties; not better, not worse. A true C-student. (It also comes as no surprise Sheriff Ivey is BFFs with like-minded authoritarian Gov. Ron DeSantis; two peas in a armor-plated fascist pod).