News
OPINION: Elon Musk’s transparency about combating mental health is being used as a hit by MSM
Elon Musk’s wide-ranging interview with Don Lemon dropped on various platforms yesterday, and among one of the discussion points was the Tesla CEO’s use of ketamine to fight depression.
“You’ve admitted that you have a ketamine prescription,” Lemon, a former CNN anchor, asked Musk during the interview. “Yeah, yeah, yeah,” Musk replied.
Lemon dug into Musk’s reasoning for using the technique to fight depression. However, Musk seemed less than enthused to talk about his personal use of a doctor-prescribed medicine to fight what he called a “negative chemical state in my brain, depression, I guess.”
Feeling somewhat blindsided by the question, Musk made it clear it seemed like an invasion of personal privacy to ask about his prescriptions.
However, even though Musk was prescribed the treatment by a doctor to fight depression, mainstream media headlines have attacked the CEO for what they are describing as “drug use,” not giving any sort of context about the drugs, their effectiveness, or even the fact that they are prescribed by a doctor.
Instead, several outlets are leaving out key details, and in a culture where headlines are becoming all that people read, it seems misleading, scummy, and extremely wrong to leave out the fact that ketamine is not being used recreationally.
One headline, for example, reads:
“Elon Musk opens up about drug use, claims it helps him in running Tesla.”
The description of the article also reads:
“Elon Musk does not think drug usage will impact his companies, government contracts, or investor relations.”
Notice there is not a single mention of the fact that his “drug use” is prescribed and not recreational.
It is no secret that Musk’s viral clip of a singular puff of a joint that combined both marijuana and tobacco is still one of the highlighted points by many skeptics. In fact, the episode even caused his security clearances to be reviewed by some government agencies.
However, the lack of details in some outlets’ coverage of Musk’s ketamine use would leave the headline readers of the world to conclude that he is using drugs recreationally in an attempt to keep his daily tasks under a manageable state. In reality, Musk said he uses “a small amount once every other week, or something like that.”
Perhaps a hot take here: I think Musk talking about his mental health battle was super awesome and he showed that he combats issues with his mind every day.
With that being said, I feel like he was definitely put on the spot here and there should have been some notice that this… https://t.co/ztj9Vo5GKL
— Joey Klender (@KlenderJoey) March 18, 2024
The coverage from media outlets proves that Musk, who also said that people with depression should consider methods that are alternatives to traditional selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI).
Medicine is obviously a case-by-case basis, but as someone who has battled both depression and anxiety for the duration of my 29 years on Earth, it is upsetting to see someone be attacked for using techniques that work for them. This is not a case of a person using recreational drugs to manage day-to-day stress. It is, in Musk’s words, “literally a prescription from a real doctor.”
Elon Musk’s Neuralink and what it means for anxiety and depression
People who have followed Tesla for basically any period of time know that the company is routinely under fire for things like recalls, car accidents, and other things.
However, attacking the company CEO over his mental health battle and the techniques used to combat a mental health condition that is very widespread is a low blow.
In America, we have come a long way in the battle against mental health ailments. Once considered a taboo topic, mental health conditions are generally accepted by society now as regular and routine issue that a lot of people deal with. According to National Institute of Mental Health, more than 50 million Americans deal with some kind of mental health issue. This is roughly one in five adults, and this only accounts for those who actually get help for their issues.
In my opinion, Musk being transparent about his mental health and his strategies to combat it was a huge win, because many people look up to him. It is perfectly okay to not be okay, even when you’re one of the most innovative minds in modern history.
I’d love to hear your thoughts on this matter. Email us at tips@teslarati.com, or you can email me directly at joey@teslarati.com. I’m also on X @KlenderJoey.
Investor's Corner
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
Tesla and SpaceX sue a small Illinois firm after cease and desist letters over Terafab.
Tesla and SpaceX are asking a federal judge to rule that their planned Terafab chip factory does not infringe a small Illinois company’s trademark, a request that arrives only after months of quiet negotiation broke down this summer.
The dispute traces to May 18, when Tesla filed three U.S. trademark applications for “Terafab” and “Tesla Terafab,” covering semiconductor chips and related chip making services. TERA-print LLC, a nanotechnology company that has held a federal trademark for “Tera-Fab” since 2021, responded five days later with a cease and desist letter. According to the lawsuit, first reported by Reuters, TERA-print argued that Tesla and SpaceX’s use of “Terafab” would confuse consumers familiar with its own trademark, which covers a desktop photolithography printer sold to researchers for sensor and bioengineering work.
What stands out in the filing is the timing of TERA-print’s own paperwork. One day before sending that cease and desist letter, on May 22, TERA-print applied to expand its existing registration to cover semiconductor materials, silicon chips, nanoelectronic devices and AI design services, categories it had not previously claimed. Tesla and SpaceX call that filing opportunistic in their complaint, noting it arrived two months after Tesla’s public Terafab announcement and just days after Tesla’s own trademark applications went in.
Elon Musk launches TERAFAB: The $25B Tesla-SpaceXAI chip factory that will rewire the AI industry
By June 10, TERA-print was threatening to sue for federal trademark infringement, false designation of origin and unfair competition, the complaint states. Rather than wait to be sued, Tesla, SpaceX and SpaceXAI met with TERA-print six separate times between June and August trying to resolve the dispute directly. Those talks collapsed, and the companies filed for declaratory judgment this week in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, asking a judge to find that “Terafab” does not infringe TERA-print’s mark before TERA-print can file a claim of its own.
TERA-print isn’t backing down. The company told PCMag it discussed a settlement with Tesla as recently as September 2 and feels misled by what it called Tesla’s professed interest in settling. Its CTO, Andrey Ivankin, said TERA-print holds a Defense Department contract to fabricate semiconductors and partially owns Mattiq Inc., an AI company built on TERA-print’s products, and that the company will vigorously defend its rights.
Tesla and SpaceX argue the overlap is superficial. Terafab is planned as a $16.8 billion complex spanning roughly 100 million square feet at the Grimes County site SpaceX confirmed last month, built to produce chips for Optimus robots, Tesla’s AI computing needs and SpaceX’s orbital data center ambitions, a scale and purpose the companies say no reasonable consumer would confuse with a tabletop lab printer. TERA-print’s product line has stayed focused on lithography tools for biological and sensor research since it registered its mark in 2021.
The trademark fight is the second legal dispute tied to the Terafab project in the past week, following a separate SpaceX suit aimed at keeping company records about the facility out of public view, as KBTX reported. Whether construction proceeds under the Terafab name now depends on a federal judge in Austin.
News
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
NHTSA escalated its Cybercab audit into a sworn Special Order with a September 30 deadline.
Federal regulators have moved from asking Tesla questions about its Cybercab to demanding sworn answers. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued a Special Order that requires a Tesla officer to sign an affidavit attesting to the completeness of the company’s responses, with a deadline of September 30.
The order builds on Audit Query AQ26002, which NHTSA opened on September 3, the same day Tesla began commercial Cybercab service in Austin. Teslarati covered that initial inquiry when it surfaced, noting the agency wanted to understand how Tesla certified a vehicle with no permanently attached steering wheel, pedals, or mirrors as compliant with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. A Special Order is a different tool and converts a fact finding review into a legally enforceable demand, the same mechanism NHTSA used against Tesla in 2023 during its Autopilot investigation.
Several of the 21 requests target a specific gap in Cybercab’s design. One asks whether Tesla used temporarily attached human controls at any point to help certify the vehicle, and if so, which standards depended on that equipment being present. Another quotes an existing rule directly: “The service brakes shall be activated by means of a foot control.” Cybercab has no foot pedal. NHTSA wants a detailed explanation of how the vehicle satisfies that requirement, and how it complies without the kind of exemption granted to Zoox in July under Part 555, the regulatory pathway built for steering wheel free vehicles.
The order does not claim Cybercab is unsafe or that Tesla broke a rule. It requires Tesla to explain, under oath, the reasoning behind decisions the company already made when it self-certified the vehicle. That distinction matters, but so does the exposure. Motor1’s reporting, summarized here, put potential civil penalty exposure as high as $139 million if NHTSA later finds the certification was flawed, on top of whatever criminal risk comes with a false sworn statement.
Tesla has not said publicly how it plans to respond. Cybercab is still carrying passengers in Austin through the Robotaxi app while the September 30 deadline approaches, and the company has continued expanding the vehicle’s footprint even as the regulatory question remains open. The Special Order does not pause any of that and just sets a date by which Tesla has to put its certification logic on the record, with a company officer’s name attached to it.
In a new interview on Wednesday, Tesla uber bull Ron Baron said that anyone looking to buy the company’s stock should do so as soon as they can.
Baron, founder and CEO of Baron Capital and one of Tesla’s most persistent institutional bulls, used a CNBC Squawk Box appearance on Wednesday to deliver a familiar message with fresh urgency: In his opinion, Tesla stock is a buy:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.”
The Baron Capital frontman’s case is built around Full Self-Driving. Tesla reported 1.48 million active FSD subscriptions in the second quarter, up 56 percent year over year, and company officials have said roughly 55 percent of new North American deliveries left with a subscription enabled.
Baron framed that attach rate as proof the product is moving from enthusiast extra to default expectation, and as a reason software, not just vehicle volume, should drive the next phase of value.
His conviction on Tesla shares is not theoretical, as Baron Capital made its first Tesla investment in 2014, after years of meetings that began around the 2010 IPO roadshow. The firm later built a large SpaceX position starting in 2017.
Ron Baron today in new interview on Tesla:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.” pic.twitter.com/Rv5PB0bVZ2
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) September 16, 2026
Baron said those Musk-led bets have generated about $30 billion of the $71 billion in profits Baron Capital has produced for clients. He put the firm’s current exposure at roughly $25 billion in SpaceX and $5 billion in Tesla. Personally, he described SpaceX as his largest holding, at about $5 billion, with about $1.5 billion in Tesla and additional Tesla exposure through the firm’s funds.
That concentration is also a statement of loyalty. Asked about talk of a SpaceX-Tesla combination, Baron said he had already walked Elon Musk through arguments for and against a deal, then declined to repeat them on air. His public position was simpler: “Whatever you decide is better is what I’m going to support,” he said to Musk.
Baron also said that he picked up the farewell edition of the Model S after Tesla decided to sunset the vehicle earlier this year, calling it his favorite car he’s ever driven.
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
