My Interview With Michael J. Fox

By: Katie Couric
Topics: Field Notes

(CBS)

I've interviewed Michael J. Fox several times before – but never quite like this.

After all the controversy and publicity and debate about his political ad, and the criticism he got from people like Rush Limbaugh, he really is in the eye of a political storm right now. But when he came to our studio for our exclusive interview, he was remarkably calm. He was also obviously symptomatic. He trembled uncontrollably, and his legs shook, but he explained it was actually a side effect of not taking enough medication. He told me he reduced his dosage because he didn't want to have dyskinesia, which is the side effect of too much medication, and which causes the swaying back and forth that was so evident in the controversial ad for Missouri Democratic Senate candidate Claire McCaskill. Fox said that he can never tell from one day to the next how serious his symptoms will be. It's a crapshoot.

Our interview lasted about 30 minutes, and we covered a wide range of topics. He explained why he favors embryonic stem cell research, why he has taken up this cause now, and why he believes he needs to do everything he can to help find a cure for debilitating diseases like Parkinson's and Alzheimer's. He talked about politics and how he supports both Democrats and Republicans -- he's a big backer of Arlen Specter, among others – and he spoke with great feeling about how he's living with this disease.

(CBS)

And he emphasized that, despite what his critics have charged, in his words, "I'm not a victim." He said he spent years having teenage girls put his poster on the wall, but that he threw his vanity out the window years ago. What matters now, he said, is finding a cure for Parkinson's.

No matter how you feel about the issue of embryonic stem cell research, you can't help but be moved by Michael J. Fox's courage.

You can see it for yourself on tonight's CBS Evening News, and later tonight the entire interview will be posted here on the Web.

91 Comments Have Your Say
Email Story Send to a Friend
Share This Tell Your Friends
Tweet This Tweet This
More Share It

Add a Comment

See all 91 Comments

by Margecam December 19, 2009 3:31 PM EST

I wish Michael would check out
http://www.stemcellpharmainc.com

Our Daughter has regained some vision via the procedure they use (Stem cell from live birth placentas & a nutrient regime that keeps the stem cells alive). Cori had 20/400 vision and now has 20/40 & 20/60 vision. Correctable to 20/20! The cataracts from her RP were too thick & too deep to safely remove. The stem cell procedure (not real invasive...four 1" incisions) allowed the softening of the cataracts, and also has helped her retina regenerate. We expect more inprovement to come.
The Doctor also treats Parkinson's. We met a man at the clinic who had the procedure against his doctor's reccomendation...but once done, and his doctor saw the improvement...the man has gone back every year for more stem cell (we met him at his 3rd treatment...didn't even realize he had Parkinsons). We can't tell you how grateful to God we are that we found Dr. Sapse & Dr.Gonzalez. I wish Michael would check into the treatments...if they can't help him...they will say so. My hubby has CLL (leukemia) & they told him that the procedure would not help him.

Reply to this comment


by Margecam December 19, 2009 3:37 PM EST: Also wanted to say that Michael is not faking his symptoms...for someone to even make such a suggestion has to be very uneducated in the realities of life. Parkinson's is a horrible affliction. I'd like to know why our country's physicians & drug companies don't want stem cell procedures to be allowed? Could it be they make more money treating the disease symptoms than they can make curing these diseases?


by faith262 October 29, 2006 12:38 PM EST: Once again the %u201Creal%u201D story isn%u2019t being reported. What does it take for the mainstream media to investigate and report the truth? Michael J. Fox made an ad that wasn%u2019t truthful. Why didn%u2019t Katie include that in her story? This is exactly why their ratings are so low.

Rush Limbaugh did not make fun of Michael J. Fox. Someone took that video and totally distorted it. If the press wanted to report the truth they could have went to Rush%u2019s site and read the transcript of the show. The 20 million people who listen to Rush weekly know the truth.; Reply to this comment


by jjensen12-2009 October 29, 2006 10:10 AM EST: My brother-in-law passed away two weeks ago from PD. Thank-you MJF for your courage.

Credit also to Rush Limbaugh for his comments. Mr. Limbaugh has never allowed his ignorance stand in the way of him shooting his mouth off.; Reply to this comment


by okreal October 29, 2006 8:23 AM EST: I was very moved by Katie's very tender interview
with Michael J Fox. My mother, who passed away 19 years ago also had Parkinson. I can still see her today trying to pour a cup of coffee, brushing her hair, trying to spread butter on a slice of bread. All the simple things that we do every day took twice as much time for her. Sometimes she would stop what she was doing and wait, sit in a chair thinking she could somehow take control and the shaking would stop. Unless you spend time with someone that has Parkinson a person really doesn't know how bad the disease can be. The quality of life is eaten up minute by minute to the point that the whole family suffers for their loved one. I can only feel sad for anyone that would laugh at Mr. Fox and this disease. I wish there had been a person as brave as Mr. Fox when mother was alive; if nothing else but to give her hope and to let her know it was ok to feel sad for herself. Before the disease she loved to eat out, shop, and go to church; that all stopped because people would stare and it make her nervouis. Thank you so much Katie for reporting on a very important subject; becasue a large part of the world does not know how bad Parkinson is. Your dad is in my thoughts and prayers.; Reply to this comment


by dailykos1 October 29, 2006 12:10 AM EDT: Why doesn't Katie put Rush in his place and demonstrate with experts that he's a jackass mocking someone who shouldn't have to 'justify' himself to anyone.

Digby says: "Katie Couric becomes part of the problem when she validates these ginned up controversies or gives credence to accusations for which there is no evidence. She knows very well that nobody can really doubt Fox's sincerity. He's raised tens of millions of dollars for the cause and it's evident to anyone with eyes to see and ears to hear that he's got this horrible disease. He should not have to prove that he's not faking his symptoms and it's unconscionable that the media is allowing the issue to be framed that way.

If it was necessary to refute Limbaugh's ridiculous claims, she should have had a leading expert in Parkinson's come on to discuss the symptoms and then interview Fox about the issue itself. Instead she presented it like a "he said/she said" by interrogating Michael J. Fox about whether it was proper for him to go ahead with the shoot when it appeared that he was going to look like a Parkinson's sufferer on camera. In doing so she validated the accusation that he might have been faking it when the only "evidence" was Limbaugh's noxious ravings."; Reply to this comment


by dailykos1 October 29, 2006 12:09 AM EDT: Katie Couric becomes part of the problem when she validates these ginned up controversies or gives credence to accusations for which there is no evidence. She knows very well that nobody can really doubt Fox's sincerity. He's raised tens of millions of dollars for the cause and it's evident to anyone with eyes to see and ears to hear that he's got this horrible disease. He should not have to prove that he's not faking his symptoms and it's unconscionable that the media is allowing the issue to be framed that way.

If it was necessary to refute Limbaugh's ridiculous claims, she should have had a leading expert in Parkinson's come on to discuss the symptoms and then interview Fox about the issue itself. Instead she presented it like a "he said/she said" by interrogating Michael J. Fox about whether it was proper for him to go ahead with the shoot when it appeared that he was going to look like a Parkinson's sufferer on camera. In doing so she validated the accusation that he might have been faking it when the only "evidence" was Limbaugh's noxious ravings.; Reply to this comment


by bttf4444 October 28, 2006 5:10 PM EDT: Dear Michael,

My heart really goes out for you. Just keep your faith. I hope that one day a cure for PD can be found. I really enjoy watching you in the Back to the Future Trilogy. I feel so bad that Rush Limbaugh and some of the others feel the need to take shots at you. You are such a sweet man, and you do exude peace and harmony. You definitely have my support.

Hugs! :); Reply to this comment


by relsj1992 October 28, 2006 11:50 AM EDT: I HAVE BEEN A PHYSICAL THERAPIST SINCE 1992. I HAVE HELPED PEOPLE WITH PARKINSON'S DISEASE REGAIN SOME QUALITY OF LIFE. SEEING RUSH LIMBAUGH MOCKED MICHAEL J FOX MADE ME VERY UPSET AND ANGRY. IT REALLY HIT A NERVE THAT I JUST STARTED CUSSING IN FRONT OF THE TV. IT IS AMAZING HOW SOMEONE CAN BE SO CLUELESS.MEAN AND JUST INSENSITIVE. SHAME ON YOU RUSH FOR DOING THIS. HOW LOW CAN YOU GET? BUT OF COURSE WHAT CAN I EXPECT FROM A DRUG ADDICT.; Reply to this comment


by jcatcws October 28, 2006 12:07 AM EDT: Each frozen embryo is owned by his/her parents, not a clinic.

By freezing unused embryos of in-vitro fertilization, a patient can have additional transfers performed with frozen embryos without having to harvest additional eggs, a rather painful process that has its health risks. Some fertilization clinics unethically cultivate and freeze as many as 50 embryos at a time rather than freeze the eggs and sperm separately and then unfreeze and cultivate embryos as needed.

The RAND-SART survey of all US fertility clinics found nearly 400,000 frozen embryos, where 88.2% were being reserved for future family building for the families that created them. These parents are quite upset with the attitude that their embryos are going to be destroyed anyway so why not experiment with them.

2.3% or 9,200 frozen embryos will be placed with another family for adoption. Over a million couples presently hope to adopt. Recently I had the privilege of playing with a snowflake child, the name given a frozen embryo that was adopted, implanted in her new mother%u2019s womb, and born a beautiful child.

2.8% of the embryos will be donated for research, 2.2% will be destroyed, and 4.4% are undecided. The 2.2% or 8,800 frozen embryos targeted to be destroyed cannot be legally used for research against the parent%u2019s wishes. It is the parent%u2019s decision that must be adhered to. The fertility clinic has no legal voice in the matter. www.rand.org/pubs/research_briefs/RB9038/index1.html; Reply to this comment


by citizenb October 27, 2006 11:50 PM EDT: MJF is a class act. Until recently, I actually had put the existence of Rush out of my mind, but sadly, in his lame attempt to garner ratings and stir political division in this country, he continues to act like the school yard bully. Grow up or go away, and let the issues be decided by the voters without hateful and irresponsible rhetoric.; Reply to this comment