University-backed proposal would fund a tightly scoped psychedelic research trial for veterans

Dr. Ben Lewis of the Huntsman Mental Health Institute told a legislative appropriations committee that HB 390 and an associated request for appropriations would authorize a narrowly scoped, time‑limited research trial to study psychedelic‑assisted therapies for veterans with treatment‑resistant post‑traumatic stress disorder, under oversight by the FDA, DEA and the University of Utah institutional review board.

"HB 390 represents a thoughtful and science‑forward approach," Lewis said, stressing the proposal is designed to generate Utah‑specific safety and outcomes data rather than to authorize clinical rollout or commercialization. He described the project as combining drug administration with a psychotherapeutic protocol and said the minimum reliable clinical‑data budget is $2,000,000. The Huntsman Mental Health Foundation has pledged $100,000 and Lewis and a colleague said they could contribute up to $250,000 in research funds, contingent on state support.

Retired Lt. Col. Matthew Butler, a veteran who spoke in support, described multiple deployments, long‑standing treatment‑resistant mental illness and personal recovery he attributes to participation in a psychedelic ceremony. "I can say without absolute certainty that I owe my life, my happiness, my sobriety ... to the use of psychedelics," Butler said, urging the committee to back the research funding so Utah can pursue medically supervised options for veterans.

Committee members asked how private fundraising and institutional philanthropy would interact with state funding. Senator Kwan and others queried whether the Huntsman center could proceed without legislative dollars and whether results from a narrowly focused veterans trial could have broader implications. Presenters said the center can raise outside funds but the proposed $2 million would be the bare minimum to produce reliable clinical data; private contributions could offset state dollars but state funding provides legislative guardrails and strengthens oversight.

The presenters emphasized the study’s regulatory safeguards and that the RFA authorizes research rather than clinical access. The committee did not take a final vote on the RFA during this session; presenters said they would welcome questions and follow up with additional details on funding breakdowns and oversight.

The committee moved on to other agenda items, leaving the research request under consideration pending further review.