Texas is on the verge of launching the largest publicly funded psychedelic research initiative in U.S. history: a $50 million public-private partnership to support FDA-approvable ibogaine trials. The initiative has drawn support from high-profile figures like Rick Perry, but also concerns over safety, cost, access, and the lack of recognition for Indigenous knowledge. We take a look at the bold plan, the political manoeuvring that made it possible, and the questions that still remain.
***
Reporting by Josh Hardman
In an unprecedented move, Texas is poised to launch a public-private partnership to fund FDA-approvable drug development trials of ibogaine, backed by $50M in state matching funds, marking what proponents claim is the largest publicly funded psychedelic research effort in history.
The initiative, formally captured in the bills SB 2308 and HB 3717, creates a grant program designed to cover the costs associated with FDA drug trials for ibogaine, a psychoactive alkaloid derived from the African iboga shrub, long used in ceremonial contexts by the Bwiti peoples of Gabon. If passed, the legislation would channel public and private dollars into ibogaine research for the treatment of opioid use disorder, co-occurring substance use disorders, and other neurological and mental health illnesses.
While it’s an enormous moment for ibogaine advocates, some have raised concerns: from the lack of engagement with traditional knowledge holders to the risks of sensationalism, and the daunting safety, cost, and scalability challenges associated with ibogaine therapy.
Rick Perry, GOP Strategists, and a $50M Pivot: How Texas Took the Lead on Ibogaine
The initiative is in large part the brainchild of Bryan Hubbard, former chair of Kentucky’s Opioid Abatement Advisory Commission, who first tried to launch the program in that state. (See Kentucky’s $42m Ibogaine Funding Appears Dead in the Water).
After his plan became politically untenable and led him to resign, Hubbard shopped around the idea of carving out state funds for ibogaine research. He said that he had ‘bet everything I am on this’, and that it has become ‘the cause of my life’.
He first looked to the state of Ohio (See Ibogaine Advocates Seek Ohio Opioid Settlement Funds Following Failure in Kentucky), but that effort fizzled out. He then says he had former South Dakota Governor (and present Secretary of Homeland Security) Kristi Noem “just within days of readiness to announce this initiative on her own between May and July of 2024”.
But that push was futile, too, “when a ballot initiative made its way onto the November election in South Dakota that would have seen a substantial reduction in that state’s sales tax.” Given the state relies on that tax for its revenues, Noem appears to have gotten cold feet due to budget uncertainty. (She was facing a “potentially immediate $150M budget deficit”, Hubbard recalls, meaning she couldn’t ‘announce a $42M ibogaine project’.)
At this point, Hubbard said he put his head in his hands.
Speaking alongside Texans for Greater Mental Health Executive Director and Veterans Exploring Treatment Solutions (VETS) Legislative Director Logan Davidson on the American Grit Podcast, Hubbard recounts what happened next. “Lo and behold, I got a call from the Lone Star State in late August of ‘24, and the question was: Our legislature has almost a $20B budget surplus, they have experience passing psychedelic legislation, and there’s a question as to what the next project will be. Do you have any ideas?”
“I said,” Hubbard went on, “in fact I do.” “Perhaps Texas will have the requisite degree of vision and courage to take on the Kentucky Ibogaine Initiative and make it its own”, he went on.
With assistance from GOP ad strategist Rex Elsass and a pivotal endorsement from former Texas Governor Rick Perry, the Lone Star State emerged as the new champion for the initiative. Hubbard now heads up the effort through a role at the REID Foundation, named in honour of Elsass’ son, who lost his life to addiction.
For Perry’s part, he has since described his support for the project as “the most important work I’ve ever done.”
Since relocating his effort to Texas, Hubbard has become increasingly vocal about his frustrations with Kentucky. Speaking on that podcast, Hubbard went beyond his well-trodden criticisms of Governor Andy Beshear to also bemoan researchers at the Kentucky College of Medicine’s Center on Drug and Alcohol Research, which he described as “inflexibly opposed” to his plans.
Legislature Fast-Tracks Bills
As we covered earlier this month, Texas lawmakers fast-tracked the Senate Bill (SB 2308) through the chamber in late April, bypassing procedural norms and holding three votes to pass the bill in under four minutes.
In presenting the bill to the Senate, its sponsor, Tan Parker (R) told lawmakers that the program “relies only on private funds.” That’s not true, at least according to the text of the bill, which allows for state funds to be used in the initiative.
Regardless, both the Senate and House Bills (HB 3717) have passed their respective chambers, but following the Senate’s refusal to concur with House amendments, differences are now being thrashed out in a conference committee.
But advocates are hopeful that it will be sorted out in short order. They’re so confident, in fact, that they have loudly proclaimed the initiative as ‘launched’, victory lapping its success on podcasts and in social media posts.
That’s a similar strategy employed by Hubbard and co. in Kentucky, where they presented the potential funding with great fanfare, including at a press conference in May 2023 where former Republican Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron kicked things off by teasing ibogaine as “the next big breakthrough”.
While that announcement apparently caught government insiders off guard, the Texas initiative appears to have more buy-in from political leaders in the state, with Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick writing on Twitter that he and Speaker Dustin Barrows “have agreed to invest an unprecedented $50 million in matching grants to begin the ibogaine trials.”
Presuming those amendments are agreed upon, the bill will be considered for final passage before heading to the Governor, Greg Abbott, for his signature.
Davidson—who Hubbard said has ‘moved mountains’ to make the bill happen in the Texas legislature—told Psychedelic Alpha that he expects the process to be wrapped up within the next week or two, though the Governor has “almost the full month of June to act on the bill.”
Infrastructure, IP, and FDA Hopes: What Comes Next if Texas Passes Its Ibogaine Bill
If the bill is signed into law, which advocates appear to believe is a shoo-in, the implementation phase begins.
The legislation would become effective on the 1st of September 2025, and thereafter the state’s Health and Human Services Committee would launch a tender process to establish the infrastructure for the program.
The specifics of that process are not yet clear, but Davidson assures it “will be designed to ensure transparency and fairness, drawing on the expertise of clinical institutions, research bodies, and treatment providers.” The group hopes that the process will be “competitive, with clear criteria to ensure that funding goes to the most qualified organizations, drug developer(s) and medical research university/clinical trial sites”.
According to the present text of the bill, applicants to the grant program must, among other things, “seek United States Food and Drug Administration approval of ibogaine” based on the trial they propose. Their strategy must be detailed in their application, including things from the entity’s team and expertise right through to post-acute treatment support and data integrity plans.
The applicant should also provide a proposal on how they intend to recognise Texas’ commercial interest in patentable intellectual property that may be generated, a plan for establishing a corporate presence in the state, a strategy for securing payor approval and for ensuring access to uninsured individuals, and so on. These are very lofty ambitions.
While the tender process is yet to be fleshed out, applicants would have no less than 90 days to submit their proposals, the text of the bill specifies.
In terms of the selection committee, the bills contemplate it including subject matter experts, philanthropic partners, and legislative designees. The state’s HHS commission considers the recommendations of the selection committee and makes a decision thereafter.
The successful applicant would then need to secure approvals from relevant state and federal bodies, and the bill also says that they should seek a breakthrough therapy designation from the FDA for ibogaine. (Note that FDA does not usually issue such designations at such an early stage of development, with Phase 2 data generally deemed necessary.)
Just how long this entire process might take is unclear. While the program envisaged by the Texas Ibogaine Initiative is unprecedented, as emphasised in a Legislative Budget Board Fiscal Note, the experience of implementing a psilocybin study in the state under HB 1802 might be informative.
That took two and a half years from application to approval, Davidson told us, though that was for a Phase 3 study. “We’ve learned many lessons since then”, he added. The advocate, who was influential in the passage of HB 1802, described that bill as “a small step”, versus the present ibogaine effort which he says is “a giant leap”.
While Davidson wouldn’t place any bets, he did say that he expects the launch of the ibogaine studies to be similar or “much faster” than that psilocybin study.
Beyond the Buzz: Quiet Concerns About Hype, Equity, and Complexity
While the psychedelics field has generally reacted with excitement to the news, some have more quietly expressed concerns around the program, especially on matters related to hype, equity, and the complexities of ibogaine therapies.
The High-Stakes Economics of Ibogaine Development
As alluded to above, a fiscal note prepared for the Texas legislature struggled to estimate the fiscal impact of the bill, noting that the baseline amount of state funding is unclear and dependent on private investment.
Davidson, meanwhile, emphasised that state funding “will not be allocated until the private funding is available”, and that the fund “will function as a match to cover the costs of the research happening in Texas at Texas institutions with Texas patients.”
While some politicians, particularly those on the more libertarian or ‘small state’ side of the equation, have questioned the potential $50M appropriation, other observers have pointed out that the sum is likely not commensurate with the ‘FDA-approvable’ goal of the program.
Given that FDA approval of a simple drug can cost upwards of $1 billion, developing ibogaine—perhaps the most complex psychedelic-like candidate—will likely require an order of magnitude greater funding than the carve-out, even assuming the maximum state match funding is deployed (i.e., $100M in combined investment).
That might be why Hubbard and co. are suggesting that other states might get in on the ibogaine action, as we discuss later.
Still, with a U.S. administration that has expressed openness to psychedelics, advocates may be hoping that an abbreviated drug development pathway might see them secure approval much faster than usual.
Despite some pointing to the relatively modest pot of cash, others have told Psychedelic Alpha that the program is a hand-out for biotechs, with the bill’s commitments to see Texans rewarded with IP rights and the like a little vague.
It is true that some ibogaine developers, including those working on analogs of the drug, are quite well capitalised. Take atai Life Sciences, for example, which is a publicly traded company with a market capitalisation of over $400M. Or Soneira Bio, an ibogaine drug development startup backed by Sergey Brin. (See Sergey Brin Bets $15M on Ibogaine Startup Soneira, But Questions Loom Over Patents.)
But, ibogaine programs have been fraught with difficulties over the decades, with concerns right through from Phase 1, on the safety front, to commercialisation modelling, given the complexity and resource-intensity of the model and uncertainty around the strength and validity of patents. While atai has a relatively strong cash position, for example, its ibogaine program is not even presented on its pipeline webpage at present, suggesting it is not a major focus.
While there are many opinions on the potential funding—too much, too little, just right—there is another looming question: Who will apply to access it?
While it does appear to offer a non-dilutive source of funding for ibogaine drug developers, the prospect of having to make concessions on things like intellectual property and future commercialisation plans (which are already areas of deep uncertainty for this candidate) could make it difficult for more established drug developers to rationalise a bid. But, given that all ibogaine development programs are early-stage, and companies like Soneira are new entirely, there may be a handful of entities that take a punt.
It is unorthodox for a state to chip in toward the development of a drug, but that could be a recognition that ibogaine is really hard to bring to market under normal circumstances. It is unclear, however, whether a public-private partnership of this kind will overcome those challenges.
A Gift Ignored? Advocates Urge Inclusion of Bwiti Elders
Others have raised questions about the lack of recognition of traditional knowledge holders and those who have been stewarding the shrub, and its use, for many years.
One such voice is Dr. Joseph Barsuglia who, along with his wife Tricia Eastman, has extensive experience with ibogaine, including running and advising clinics and retreats, studying with Bwiti elders in Gabon, fundraising for iboga preservation, and advising ibogaine efforts in four U.S. states. He’s also involved in university programs and is working on several upcoming Phase 1/2 ibogaine trials, including one at Walter Reed.
In speaking to Psychedelic Alpha he was at pains to not appear as overly-critical, as he remains an overwhelming advocate for research into ibogaine and analogs thereof.
But he has deep concerns around whether (and if so, how) Indigenous knowledge holders will be recognised in any intellectual property generated through the initiative. While the bill envisages the state of Texas as a beneficiary of such IP, there is no mention of Gabon, for example, Barsuglia points out.
That could run contrary to the Nagoya Protocol, Barsuglia said, referencing an international agreement that aims to set terms around access to and benefit sharing around genetic resources. The U.S. is not a party to the agreement, though there may be recourse through other international agreements and treaties.
What’s more, extracting IP from Gabon to the benefit of Americans—whether Texans or not—would not be a new thing, Barsuglia suggested, pointing to the history of Howard Lotsof’s supposed discovery of the anti-addictive effects of ibogaine in the early ‘60s.
In the late ‘80s, Barsuglia explains, Lotsof was gifted forty kilos of iboga from former Gabon President Omar Bongo, who said at the time that it is “Gabon’s gift to the world”. “Shortly thereafter Lotsof proceeded to file numerous patents”, Barsuglia went on, “which strained the relationship with the Gabonese and is in public letters, per Yann Guignon from Blessings of the Forest.”
Bwiti elders are acutely aware of risks around biopiracy and appropriation, Barsuglia added, pointing to public comments made by the likes of Missoko Bwiti elder and attorney Moubeyi Bouale, who spoke at a Bwiti Elder Council in Gabon earlier this year.
“With iboga and ibogaine, the paper trail linking the history of ibogaine in the U.S. to Gabon’s traditional knowledge and prior art could pose legal challenges if indigenous tribes pursue action in international courts”, Barsuglia said.
Aside from concerns around the exploitation of their knowledge, Barsuglia also mentioned historical experimentation with ibogaine in the U.S., “including CIA-led studies on African Americans at the Federal Narcotics Hospital in Lexington, Kentucky…where the Texas initiative’s framework began.”
Gabonese people are aware of this history, Barsuglia said. Yann Guignon, founder of Blessings of the Forest, an NGO that aims to protect iboga and traditional knowledge surrounding it, mentioned this in a Gabon Review article published earlier this month.
While the likelihood of a successful legal challenge may be slim, especially given the U.S.’ sidestepping of relevant international agreements like Nagoya and there being no reason to believe the current administration would be any more attentive to such matters, people like Barsuglia believe there is a more fundamental ethical responsibility at play.
On this topic, Davidson told us that “it’s important to note that the Texas Ibogaine Initiative is rooted in a science-driven approach to mental health treatment”, though he added: “we also recognize the importance of engaging with Indigenous communities and ensuring their voices are part of the conversation”.
But those decisions will be up to the state HHS Commission, Davidson suggested, who “will be working with various stakeholders, potentially including Indigenous leaders, to ensure that the implementation of this initiative is respectful and inclusive.”
It is the agency, according to the current verbiage in the bill, that would have the authority to determine advisory board members, Davidson said, adding that they “will engage stakeholders as they see fit, as will the drug developers and public partners.”
Those with concerns in this realm will hope that such voices will be included during the implementation phase of the initiative, though some pointed out that a key principle of agreements like the Nagoya Protocol and the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples is ‘Free, Prior, and Informed Consent’.
But might the focus on a “science-driven approach” hint at an appeal to the political sensibilities of Texas? It would not be surprising if those behind the initiative continued to focus on more politically salient, and safe, stakeholders, like veterans, given the fact that it’s a decidedly Republican state.
Are Advocates Overselling Ibogaine?
The language used by many in support of the initiative is emphatic, boasting of the ‘curative’ effects of the substance or its ability to ‘promote neurological repair’, and so on. What’s more, those sweeping proclamations have been made on platforms as large as The Joe Rogan Experience, where Hubbard and Perry attracted more than a million views.
Speaking on that podcast, Perry said that ibogaine “is the most powerful way to affect the most people in a positive way of anything I’ve ever seen in forty years of public service”, for example.
In a video that sees him triumphantly standing in front of the White House, Hubbard said that he expects ibogaine to be integrated into the U.S. healthcare system “to deliver its curative effects for anyone who would choose to use it.”
Elsewhere, the bill’s House sponsor Cody Harris has argued that ibogaine is not “just another drug”, but that “it’s a whisper of redemption in a single dose.” Barsuglia and Eastman said that this was “overgeneralised and potentially misleading”, noting that many people with opioid use disorder have needed repeated dosing to achieve a durable outcome.
Other researchers and clinicians that Psychedelic Alpha spoke with are also concerned about this boosterism, urging that advocates not get ahead of the data. That’s especially the case, they said, when considering the drug’s potential applications in diseases like multiple sclerosis and Parkinson’s, where data remains very limited. But even in more prominently touted applications of the substance, such as in mild traumatic brain injury, evidence is of relatively low quality. (See, for example, Eagerly Anticipated Ibogaine Study Publishes.)
They have also emphasised—particularly those with experience administering the drug—that ibogaine is no quick fix and is not necessarily a ‘one and done’ solution.
That might get at another issue with how the Initiative has been run thus far, Barsuglia says, in that he believes it has “not sufficiently engaged mission-critical stakeholders, including international medical ibogaine providers and traditional knowledge holders.”
Even aside from the knowledge held by elders in Gabon and elsewhere, which he believes deserves a prominent role in the initiative, he cited nearly thirty years of use in clinics and retreats across the world, representing ‘tens of thousands of patients’. He believes that these experts should have been involved from the start.
Aside from what some deem to be sensationalism and an oversimplification of ibogaine therapy, which advocates might brush off as a necessary evil when politicking, others still have found Hubbard’s spiritual comments to be off-putting.
The ibogaine advocate has repeatedly linked ibogaine as a potential solution to things like the ‘dissolution of family and community’ in the U.S., which he says precludes peoples’ ability to affirm their own divinity.
Speaking on The Joe Rogan Experience, for example, Hubbard said that “its ability to affirm the reality of our human divinity” is in fact “the greatest attribute that ibogaine has”. He said that, among other things, it has the “ability to connect to the majestic eternal love of that creator”, adding: “Ibogaine delivers it, I can attest to the fact that it delivers it.”
Many would fairly describe Hubbard as eccentric, but some are concerned that his monologues might hint at a broader project of ibogaine-assisted spiritualisation.
Can Texas Make Ibogaine Accessible?
Aside from concerns that some have raised around equitably recognising the contributions of traditional knowledge holders, a glaring question is how ibogaine therapy will be made accessible to patients, even in the event of FDA approval.
A great deal of digital ink has been spilt on these pages around the high costs, at least relative to standard of care, of psychedelic therapies. That has spurred investors and drug developers alike to shift toward focusing on shorter-acting psychedelics, or non-hallucinogenic psychedelics entirely, in an attempt to bring more scalable options to market.
Ibogaine therapy flies in the face of that trend, at least when discussing conventional ibogaine as opposed to derivatives or analogs, with a price tag that could be around $50,000. Given the high resource intensity of the therapy, it’s hard to imagine how it could be scaled to an extent where a meaningful portion of Texans would benefit from it.
A high-volume ibogaine clinic, for example, is seeing up to sixty patients per month. Given that Texas has more veterans than any other state, at over 1.5 million individuals, treating just a small portion of those former service members would entail an enormous amount of infrastructure.
But Davidson says that advocates are on it. “The goal is to make this therapy accessible to as many individuals as possible,” he told us, “particularly those suffering from conditions like PTSD, traumatic brain injury (TBI), and substance use disorders, especially opioid use disorder.”
“While ibogaine therapy is complex, the program is designed to address these challenges by working with partners who can help create cost-effective treatment models”, he continued. “Additionally, the tender process will prioritize organizations that are committed to equity and ensuring that underserved populations have access to these life-changing treatments.”
Just how that might be achieved is certainly something to watch.
As alluded to, much of the expense associated with ibogaine therapy comes down to its clinical complexity and the duration of monitoring required. It’s widely regarded to be the most difficult of all psychedelics to safely administer, involving cardiac precautions and days of monitoring.
Indeed, safety concerns have thrown spanners into the works of multiple ibogaine development efforts. As we reported last February, DemeRx’s (an atai program) Phase I study of ibogaine had planned to administer doses up to 12 mg/kg, but stopped at the penultimate dose, 9 mg/kg. As such, the highest dose employed in the study is lower than the types of doses used in clinics in countries like Mexico, according to a practitioner we spoke with at the time.
But Davidson emphasises that, like HB 2021, the Initiative is the first of its kind in the U.S., if signed into law, and “there will be learning opportunities as we go.” That’s a similar line used by those who have backed psilocybin programs in states like Oregon and Colorado, who acknowledge that being the first such programs in the country means there will be hiccups to be ironed out in time.
Awaiting a Signature, Aiming for a ‘Global Movement’
Should the legislature pass a final copy of the bill and Governor Abbott lend it a signature, preparations to launch the call for proposals from third parties will begin later this year. If past experience is informative, it could be a couple of years before trials begin getting underway.
While there is still plenty of work to be done to get the Texas initiative off the ground, Hubbard already has plans to expand his vision.
In that video address to supporters in front of the White House fence, he said that “over the next 18 to 24 months there will be the emergence of a national movement that will translate itself to global relevance as we bring in partnerships through a multi-state coalition that will align to expand the scope and scale of these trials in tandem with international partners that will come forward over the next year to make this a genuinely global movement.”
The group behind the initiative says that other states have been in contact, with representatives from fifteen states at the inaugural Aspen Ibogaine Meeting last month.
Texas’ openness to the initiative clearly benefited from support among influential politicians and public figures, but it is also likely an artefact of the state’s substantial budget surplus.
But if Hubbard and co. are able to carve out more state funds for ibogaine development initiatives, they might begin to make a meaningful dent in the timeline to approval. Still, it remains to be seen just how states could coordinate on one ibogaine drug development plan, which would also entail the participation of third parties.
Regardless of these looming questions and areas of concern, the fact that the Texas Ibogaine Initiative nears final passage and a signature from the Governor is an enormous achievement for its advocates. ∎
