Fact Check: Don't fall for this story about Musk paying medical bills, arranging Neuralink brain implant for sick girl
In March 2025, tech billionaire Elon Musk paid the medical bills of Lily Thompson, a 7-year-old with a rare neurological disorder, and also arranged for an experimental device produced by his company Neuralink to be implanted in the child's brain.
Rating:
In late March 2025, a rumor spread online that Elon Musk, the tech billionaire and adviser to U.S. President Donald Trump, paid for the medical bills of Lily Thompson, a 7-year-old girl who allegedly suffered from a rare neurological condition.
According to the rumor, Musk also arranged to have the girl's brain implanted with the experimental brain-computer interface device that Musk's company Neuralink produces, leading to her miraculous recovery.
Some (archived) social media posts (archived) about the rumor included an image that appeared to show Musk next to a child in a hospital bed and a caption reading:
When Elon Musk heard about 7-year-old Lily Thompson, a girl battling a rare neurological disorder that left her unable to walk, speak, or even breathe without assistance. She was facing astronomical costs and fading hope, Lily's family received an unexpected lifeline when Musk personally pledged to cover every penny of her care, including a pioneering surgery that could restore her chance at a normal childhood.
Lily's condition, a degenerative brain disorder diagnosed at age 3, had defied conventional treatments, leaving her parents desperate as medical bills soared past $2 million. Enter Elon Musk, who, after reading about her plight in a local news story, directed his Musk Foundation to intervene. He not only paid off the family's debts but funded an experimental procedure at a top California hospital, implanting a Neuralink chip to repair damaged neural connections. "No child should suffer when we have the tools to help," Musk reportedly told doctors, insisting on fast-tracking the effort to give Lily a fighting chance.
So before you key a random person's Tesla, or set fire to a Tesla dealership, or speak ill of the great Elon Musk. I ask you, what the hell did you do for Lily?
(Facebook page Just the Facts)
Other (archived) posts (archived) about the rumor consisted of the same image with a shorter caption reading, "Elon Musk covered all medical expenses and fully funded the surgery and Neural Chip implantation to save this poor little girl's life. Thank you, sir!" along with a link to an article on a website called News.Citestesitu.com that purported to give further details about Musk's interactions with the girl.
That article began:
Elon Musk, the billionaire trailblazer of Tesla and SpaceX, has touched hearts worldwide by stepping in to save a young girl's life, covering all her medical expenses and funding a groundbreaking Neuralink chip implantation. The story unfolded on March 22, 2025, when Musk learned of 7-year-old Lily Thompson, a girl battling a rare neurological disorder that left her unable to walk, speak, or even breathe without assistance. Facing astronomical costs and fading hope, Lily's family received an unexpected lifeline when Musk personally pledged to cover every penny of her care, including a pioneering surgery that could restore her chance at a normal childhood.
In short, there was no evidence that the story about Musk paying a child's medical bills and arranging for a Neuralink device to be implanted into her brain was anything but a fictional tale designed to garner clicks and shares. As a result, we've rated the claim false.
First, the timeline of events described in the News.Citestesitu.com article was impossible. According to it, Musk first learned of Thompson's plight on March 22, 2025 — only a day before the March 23 publication date of the article. The article claimed that Thompson had not only already undergone the implantation surgery by the time the article went live the following day, but also that she began to speak and walk "within days" after the surgery.
The article also referred to social media phenomena that did not occur in reality. Part of the article read, "Online, X erupted with praise, with users sharing Lily's before-and-after photos under hashtags like #MuskSaves and #NeuralinkMiracle, turning her story into a beacon of hope for families facing similar struggles."
A search (archived) on X for one of those hashtags, #MuskSaves, returned two results, neither of which related to the Thompson story in any way. A search (archived) for the hashtag #NeuralinkMiracle returned no results.
A Google search for the terms "Lily Thompson" and "Neuralink" also found no media coverage of the story, which would have made headlines if it were true.
In addition to the lack of any demonstrable evidence corroborating the details of the story, both the text of the article and the image of Musk next to the child in the hospital bed showed signs of being the products of artificial intelligence (AI) software.
The AI text detectors ZeroGPT and GPTZero both found a high probability that the text of the article was AI-generated. Likewise, the AI image detectors WasItAI and Decopy AI reported with high confidence that the image was the work of an AI program.
Human trials for the Neuralink device have been ongoing since early 2024, when doctors implanted the company's chip in the brain of an adult quadriplegic man. Although that patient has spoken positively of the implant, it did not restore his ability to use his limbs. In March 2025, the patient told the BBC that he hoped he might someday be able to control his wheelchair through the device, but that for the time being he largely used it to play computer games.
Musk announced in January 2025 that a total of three volunteer patients had so far undergone implantation of the chip and that he hoped the company would implant up to 30 more devices in human patients in 2025.
Although not all of the patients' identities were public at the time of this writing, there was no indication that any of them were children. According to Neuralink's website, patients interested in enrolling in future clinical trials must be legal adults:
(Neuralink)
We've previously investigated other fictional claims about Musk that appeared to be entirely or partially the product of AI software, such as a rumor that he saved the home of an elderly woman who had lived there for 70 years.
"Elon Musk Says a Third Patient Got a Neuralink Brain Implant. The Work Is Part of a Booming Field." AP News, 13 Jan. 2025, https://apnews.com/article/elon-musk-neuralink-brain-computer-interface-9dbc92206389f27fd032825cf1597ee5.
Esposito, Joey. "Watch out for This Story about Musk Once Saving the Home of an Elderly Woman." Snopes, 13 Mar. 2025, https://www.snopes.com//fact-check/home-elderly-woman-musk/.
Kantrowitz, Alex. Full Q&A: Neuralink Patient Noland Arbaugh on His Injury, Selection, and Newfound Superpower. https://www.bigtechnology.com/p/full-q-and-a-neuralink-patient-noland. Accessed 26 Mar. 2025.
Neuralink. "Neuralink — Pioneering Brain Computer Interfaces." Neuralink, https://neuralink.com/. Accessed 26 Mar. 2025.
---. "PRIME Study Progress Update — User Experience." Neuralink Blog, 8 May 2024, https://neuralink.com/blog/prime-study-progress-update-user-experience/.
The Man with a Mind-Reading Chip in His Brain, Thanks to Elon Musk. 23 Mar. 2025, https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cewk49j7j1po.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Tesla Shares Tumble. Is It Time to Buy the Dip or Run for the Hills?
Key Points For a second straight quarter, Tesla posted weak auto deliveries and revenue. The company once again hyped its robotaxi and robot ambitions. The stock is largely valued based on future bets paying off, making it risky to own. These 10 stocks could mint the next wave of millionaires › Tesla (NASDAQ: TSLA) has long been a stock that's traded more on the vision of its founder Elon Musk than on its actual fundamentals. However, with the stock sinking following Tesla's lackluster second-quarter earnings report -- despite more big promises around robotaxis and robots -- reality might finally be catching up to it. Musk has done a lot of brand damage to Tesla over the past six months or so. His funding of President Donald Trump's campaign and overseeing the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) angered many liberal-leaning consumers. He then later got in a very public feud with the President he helped get elected, alienating himself and Tesla from many conservatives, as well. The fallout could be seen in Tesla's Q2 numbers, while tariffs also stung the company. Meanwhile, it will soon see an even potentially bigger headwind due to the expiration of the U.S. electric vehicle (EV) credit by the end of third-quarter 2025. Its core auto business is struggling For the second straight quarter, Tesla saw big declines in its core auto business. After a 13% drop in deliveries in the first quarter, deliveries fell by the same amount in Q2. Model 3 and Model Y deliveries decreased by 12%, while other models plunged by 52%. Tesla's auto revenue plunged 16% to $16.7 billion in the quarter. Within its auto revenue, its regulatory credits, which are pure gross margin, fell by more than half to $429 million. Not surprisingly, this affected Tesla's profitability in the quarter. Even worse for the company is that many of these regulatory credits will soon be going away. Trump's "Big Beautiful Bill" will eliminate the current federal $7,500 EV tax credit at the end of September. As a result, Musk admitted that the company could be in for a "few rough quarters" ahead. Overall, Tesla's revenue fell 12% to $22.5 billion. Its energy generation and storage revenue dropped 7% to $2.8 billion, while its service revenue climbed 17% to nearly $3.1 billion. Adjusted earnings per share sank 23% to $0.40, while its adjusted earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization (EBITDA) declined by 7% to $3.4 billion. Tesla's cash flow is also starting to take a hit. Its operating cash flow sank 30% to $2.5 billion, while its free cash flow cratered by 89% to $146 million. More big promises Given Tesla's poor operating results, it was not surprising that Musk and the rest of management directed the conversation toward Tesla's big bets on autonomous driving and robotics. Musk claimed that Tesla will expand its autonomous ride-hailing service to cover half of the U.S. population by the end of this year, pending regulatory approval. Now, of course, such a statement makes little sense. The company is currently only testing a small geofenced area in Austin, Texas, with safety drivers, and it has already had a number of safety issues in this small pilot. Its technology appears nowhere close to ready to be adopted in cities countrywide. But let's say, for argument's sake, that the technology and regulatory approvals work out. The company would then need hundreds of thousands of Level 4 autonomous driving vehicles on the road (not its current Level 2 vehicles). Beyond that, it would also need service and cleaning centers, as well as charging infrastructure in place to handle a fleet of that size. It would also need to have a consumer-facing platform that can handle things like pre-trip pricing, dynamic fare calculations, disputes, and refunds. There is no evidence that Tesla has any of this in place. Meanwhile, Musk continued to sing the praises of his Optimus robot, saying it will be Tesla's biggest product ever. He said Optimus 3 has an "exquisite" design with no significant flaws. He's looking to have a prototype of the new robot by the end of this year and then scale production next year. He then wants to be able to produce 1 million Optimus robots a year within five years. Once again, this seems ambitious. Amazon (NASDAQ: AMZN) is currently an AI robotics leader, and companies like Boston Dynamics have showcased robots with advanced mobility, so robots can be hugely useful. However, all Tesla has ever demonstrated is a humanoid robot that could only do carefully choreographed tasks. Today, most factory automation is done by specialized, fixed-purpose robots. The use case for a humanoid robot is still very questionable. Should investors buy the dip? Even after the stock pullback, Tesla's stock trades at a forward price-to-earnings ratio (P/E) of over 170x based on 2025 analyst estimates, while its profitable auto peers -- like Ford, General Motors, and Stellantis -- generally have multiples of 10 or less. With its core auto business struggling, this indicates that the bulk of Tesla's market cap is predicated on ambitions that may or may not pan out. Given the company's track record of overpromising and under-delivering, this is not a bet I'd make. Should you buy stock in Tesla right now? The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $636,628!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $1,063,471!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 1,041% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 183% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of July 21, 2025 Geoffrey Seiler has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Amazon and Tesla. The Motley Fool recommends General Motors and Stellantis. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Tesla Shares Tumble. Is It Time to Buy the Dip or Run for the Hills? was originally published by The Motley Fool Sign in to access your portfolio
USA Today
24 minutes ago
- USA Today
Republicans, Democrats are held captive by extremes. Americans need a new party.
Does America need a viable third political party? Republicans and Democrats alike sound off – and actually agreed on something – in our latest Opinion Forum. In June – which yes, feels like a lifetime ago – billionaire and former first buddy Elon Musk began floating the idea of an "America Party" on the social media platform he's colonized. Originally a response to President Donald Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which Musk viewed as an "insane spending bill," this new third party would "actually represent the 80% in the middle" and give voters back their "freedom." It's an interesting idea – and not necessarily new. America, as we're reminded every general election, does have more than two political parties, but those splintered factions rarely result in anything of consequence. Instead, our politics are an endless ping-pong match between Republicans and Democrats – which many Americans increasingly view as two sides of the same coin. So is a true multiparty system the way forward? And is Musk, as divisive as he is, the one to lead it? Those were some of the questions we asked USA TODAY readers for our latest Forum. We heard people from each political party and found some surprising consensus. Read their responses below. A third party isn't enough. America needs an entirely new system. America doesn't just need a third party – it needs a full-spectrum awakening. The system we're living in isn't just outdated ‒ it's misaligned with the reality of who we are today. Tradition has its place, but clinging to it out of habit keeps us locked into patterns that no longer serve us. The problems we face now are wildly different from those of the past, so why are we still trying to solve them with yesterday's blueprints? We need more than another political faction; we need a radical reimagining of how representation works. For too long, our politics have been stuck in black-and-white thinking: left or right, red or blue, us versus them. The idea that one person – usually male, usually from a singular political perspective – can fully represent an entire nation is outdated. Lived experience matters. And no matter how well-intentioned he may be, a man cannot truly fight for women the way a woman can. The same goes in reverse. Each brings something vital to the table, and that's why America needs more than just a third party – it needs a shared leadership model. Your Turn: President Trump, I supported you. Release the Epstein list – or resign. | Opinion Forum Imagine a presidency not defined by solo power but co-led by two individuals with contrasting yet complementary identities ‒ say, a woman and a man from different ideological spaces. Together, they could challenge groupthink, broaden empathy and offer layered approaches to complex issues. Conflict wouldn't be avoided ‒ it'd be used as a strength to build deeper solutions. Our most marginalized voices wouldn't be tokens ‒ they'd have champions on both sides. Sure, this idea may cause some readers to flip their lids. But history has shown us that progress doesn't come wrapped in comfort. It comes when someone says 'What if?' and dares to sketch it out loud. As for Elon Musk? He didn't build with a brain ‒ he built with money. He footed bills and took credit. He couldn't hold a thought together or support his own child for being themselves. That's not genius. That's cowardice. Power without empathy is a threat, not a solution. We don't need leaders who smile for the cameras while people suffer. We need firewalls, not figureheads. If you can't fight for people without cash behind them, you don't get to represent any of us. The Republican Party is consumed by extremism and fear tactics. The Democratic Party is fractured and too often indecisive. Both chase headlines while families struggle, health care costs explode and trust erodes. Neither party centers everyday people, and that's the core failure. — Kayleisha Miller, Coal Township, Pennsylvania Our political parties have been lost to oligarchs. We need a shake-up. We need a viable third party to shake up the status quo. Both the Republican and Democratic parties are being held hostage by the extreme right and left of their parties. We need a party that is not beholden to American oligarchs. It needs to govern with common sense and realize that compromise is not a four-letter word. As a nation, we used to value these traits. Now it's a take-no-hostage era. Do you want to take part in our next Forum? Join the conversation by emailing forum@ You can also follow us on X, formerly Twitter, @usatodayopinion and sign up for our Opinion newsletter to stay updated on future Forum posts. Musk is one of the oligarchs of the United States. He is a businessman whose sole raison d'être is to make a profit. One cannot run a nation like one runs a company. Both parties are being held captive by the extreme right and left wings of their parties. The Democrats have lost their focus on the issues that mean the most to the people. They have forgotten who the working people are in this nation. They need to realize people don't want a cradle-to-grave nanny state. The Republicans have come under the spell of authoritarian governance. As much as they profess to care about the working people, they care more about the American oligarchs. — Paul Tonello, Sparks, Nevada If we had better people in power, two parties would be enough. But we don't. If there were representatives who would vote to represent the people who elected them on different issues, rather than always being in lockstep, a two-party system works very well. A multiparty system that requires different coalitions on different issues would work better than what is happening in Congress. I believe that fiscal responsibility, compassion for those in need, smaller government and stewardship of national assets would win the greatest coalition's vote. Musk's resources are important, but getting moderates from each party to be involved would be more important. Also, getting more people who are not currently involved in politics could make it very powerful. Neither party is doing anything to make the future better for our children and grandchildren. I wish we had good people instead of people who thrive on power and ego. — LaMar Stephenson, Spanish Fork, Utah It's a matter of when, not if, a third party will emerge in America The existing two-party system limits the people's choices. They coexist in a symbiotic relationship. Much like defense and plaintiff attorneys. They need each other to exist. Loyalty among the members is first to their respective party, not the Constitution. In my sphere of connections across all of America, I have yet to meet a person who does not believe a third party is a necessity. It is my belief that the time of a two-party system has passed. A new political system is a necessity. If we have a third option, more fiscally conservative and socially moderate, this country will be better served. When, not if, this happens, the legacy parties might wake up and realize they have lost touch with the American system. It is incumbent on the news media, which has also polarized, to begin an honest reporting of this movement. A third party should be fiscally conservative and socially moderate, protecting the future of America and not buying votes by borrowing from the future. The youth of America will wake up and align with a new model. Musk has the resources to overcome the start-up challenges of a viable third party. He has clearly shown his commitment to improving government and its misdirected leadership. But he is not the person to lead the party. We need a charismatic younger leader who comes from the heartland, has been in the actual world and served his country. Service in the military is important. It's too easy to place young Americans in harm's way when they have not also made that choice. Look at how few elected officials have served or have children in service. Service can take many forms that reflect their passion for serving the United States. The two parties exist to support each other. Loyalty by their members is to the party, not the country. Congress demands this loyalty. Leadership punishes those with loyalty to country above party. — Bob Jones, Dadeville, Alabama We need a political party that isn't beholden to the rich The present political parties are beholden to the rich. We need a party that also hears the people. A better party would focus on middle-class needs, education, helping college kids with their future, present and past college bills. It would focus on the environment and upholding and advancing the ideals of the Declaration of Independence: life, liberty the pursuit of happiness and equality for all. We need a party that has a little nuance on issues and looks for ways to solve problems with compromise. Our young people need affordable housing. Medical care should not be tied to employment. And we need to restore the sense of community that we have lost in some places ‒ a sense that there is something greater than me. Musk is not the person to lead a third party. He has done too much damage by reelecting President Donald Trump and with DOGE, the Department of Government Efficiency. I suppose his money could be useful. The Republican Party is firmly under the control of Trump. He is corrupt, cruel and embraces chaos. The GOP should be renamed the CCCP. Most of the Democratic leaders do not know how to resist Trump. There needs to be a moral rebirth in our nation. Many are morally blind to Trump and his actions. Who are we? What does it mean to be an American? What is right and wrong? Many are under the influence of conspiracy theories and do not realize that they are being played for money. — Rick Jones, Mount Gilead, Ohio You can read diverse opinions from our USA TODAY columnists and other writers on the Opinion front page, on X, formerly Twitter, @usatodayopinion and in our Opinion newsletter.
Bloomberg
25 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
A Tesla Chip Deal Gives Samsung a Much Needed Boost
Here's an Elon Musk association that's seen as a good thing. Tesla may be in a sales slump, but its multiyear chip deal with Samsung Electronics is giving the South Korean company a boost. Samsung will produce artificial intelligence semiconductors for Tesla in a new $16.5 billion pact. The agreement will run through the end of 2033, giving Samsung a much needed win after having steadily lost ground to leading chipmaker TSMC. The plan is for an upcoming plant in Taylor, Texas, to produce Tesla's next-generation AI6 chip, Musk said on X, confirming a Bloomberg News report. Samsung's Seoul-traded shares rose 6.8% to their highest since September, while its suppliers like Soulbrain jumped as much as 16%. Musk, 54, will walk the production line himself and has been authorized by Samsung to assist in optimizing production, he said.
