Michael J Fox Ad

I've always had a secret affinity for Michael. We're about the same age, approximately the same build and he's always played characters I could relate to. I was more than a little surprised and saddened when I found he's got Parkinson's, then a few years later was more than surprised when it became a possible diagnosis for me.

He's running an ad in Missouri on an issue he backs, stem cell research, to which I say, "good for him". The question in the media is, was he off his meds when he did it?



The answer is: absolutely not. This is what you look like when the treatment for Parkinson's is successful. When it's not, you look much, much worse. Depending on how far down the path he is, he might not be able to move or speak at all if he were off his meds.

Take a good look, this is the difference between a treatment and a cure. Just like diabetes, just like Alzheimer’s, just like MS (but unlike ALS where there isn't even a treatment), it's a long term, disabling disease, and the treatments are quite crude.

Will stem cells cure him? No. Will they help? No. Do we know that they will ever work? No. Stem cells might be a dead end, like so many other kinds of scientific research. Still, it's the best we have at the moment.

Do I think he should have made the commercial? Sure, why not? It's a cause he believes in, presented in an honest way. Let the marketplace decide.

And, btw, I think the whole "meds" question is a red herring. The presumption is that if he were "on meds" he'd look just fine and that if he were off he'd be somehow "faking". This is the Fallacy of False Choice. Off meds he looks bad, on meds he looks bad differently, either way there is no deception here, just his choice of how to appear.