text:
Deen - Why did she keep it a secret for three years while deep frying butter?
- b
- Bellachefa Jan 17, 2012 02:44 PM
I can understand any celebrity whether it be food, hollywood or whatever, wanting a certain amount of privacy, but. . . as this story is now on local tv nationwide. . .
Seems to me she waited for a reason to reveal it, and that was to shill for a drug company.
I fear that poor Tony was on the mark with his slam.
Anyone remember the Galloping Gourmet? He transformed his whole public persona and way of life and taught healthy cooking once he was diagnosed as ill.
She waited for a pill that she could sell. Or so it would seem.
Why did she keep it a secret for three years while deep frying butter?
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ and so on.
re: porker
porker, we are buds, but that is not a Warhol...
re: Veggo
It was supposed to be a riff of Leepa's response with a bunch of dollar signs made to look like a big .....dollar sign. The CH formatting was all wrong and I gave up on trying to figure out spacing and pilcrows...
$$ $ $$
$$ $
$$ $
$$ $
$ $$
$ $$
$ $$
$$ $ $$
...maybe more of a Pollock
re: porker
I caught it before your edit, porker, u b stylin' !
re: karykat
As Bill Clinton does now, very much to his credit and his legacy.
re: karykat
Trailer trash cooking for the unwashed.
re: Muchlove
Everywhere except the ninth ward.
"When your signature dish is hamburger in between a doughnut, and you've been cheerfully selling this stuff knowing all along that you've got Type 2 Diabetes… It's in bad taste if nothing else." -Anthony Bourdain
"Paula Deen was allowed to shill for a pharmaceutical company while basically saying people shouldn't have to stop eating bacon-fried bacon cake in bacon sauce because of a little ol' disease." - The Superficial
re: lynnlato
We vote her off the island. Like an ice shelf that calves under bright light.
re: LindaWhit
re: lynnlato
If the disease is diabetes, they shouldn't have to stop eating meat or fat. It's the carbs they need to cut.
re: KWagle
re: KWagle
Actually, everything should be cut a bit (and you're right, especially the starchy carbs...but not the good carbs that come from vegetables; those should still be 35-40% of the diet).
A diet _too_ high in protein is very rough on the kidneys. And that's definitely a concern with diabetes.
re: The Professor
Actually, there is no one carb level or diet that fits all. I eat as many veggies as my glucose meter says I can without doing damage. By caloric percentage, my carbs are about 10-20% and very high fiber, by volume, they're huge amounts. Protein doesn't damage kidneys, that's an urban myth. Glucose damages kidneys. I reversed over a decade of advanced kidney damage on high protein and have kept my GFR well above the low end of normal for over a decade eating this way.
Low carbers aren't eating more protein than most folks, we're just having it with veggies instead of starches and eating higher fat than the ill conceived recommended guidelines have been calling for.
There's no reason to cut everything; I had to cut carbs and add protein and veggies. Cutting out starches drops so many calories there's no need to cut further.
re: pikawicca
very odd time on Bobby's " healthier " cooking show eh?
re: rozz01
What's that saying ... "timing is everything!"
re: rozz01
Haven't been following this too close, but also think this was really timed with her son's new show. Saw an interview the other day and she sounded really out of it, she kept saying "everything in moderation", but she never, ever said that her cooking was unhealthy, and that is just what it is.
re: Barbara76137
Haven't been following this too close, but also think this was really timed with her son's new show.
you're not the only one who thinks so.
re: goodhealthgourmet
hi ghg, same as this OP http://chowhound.chow.com/topics/8295...
But, even if that's true (and I do believe you're both correct) and very transparent of FN and PD...does being a strong business woman make you an ass? All the folks on FN with few if any exception par lay from one gig to another. So what's the foul here?
re: HillJ
you know, i didn't even bother to look for a separate thread about the article - i just assumed someone would post it here or on the other ongoing discussion instead of creating a third one! oops.
and i can't speak for anyone else, but IMO the "foul here" is that she concealed her illness as though it was something shameful, yet continued to encourage her viewers to prepare and eat copious amounts of the foods that may very well have contributed to it...all the while making a killing off of it.
as for my [prior] opinion of her as a businesswoman:
but this whole scenario just left a really bad taste in my mouth.
re: goodhealthgourmet
I don't think Paul Deen has really processed her personal situation no matter how disappointed the public is.
re: carbonaraboy
Absolutely. PD is not a "business" of one. Lots of folks on the payroll and posse. Spokeperson/the face of, yes. The business decision I suspect a foul by many.
re: goodhealthgourmet
The other son is getting a show too that is about family cooking. She mentioned it when she was on the Chew last week.
re: EM23
I think it's already on the air.
I don't care about Paula Deen or her health or her recipes. She can live or die as far as I am concerned (I know that sounds harsh). She allowed herself to become a caricature for money.
What I find odd (or interesting) is FoodTV's total inability to control their 'brand.' Every other major network does so, as do sports leagues and franchises. I don't see how it is appropriate for Paula Deen to shill for a drug company.
re: Dimbo
Every other major network does so, as do sports leagues and franchises.
Ha! While not at all topic related here, Dimbo I can't believe you believe that. No tv persoanlity scandals, no sports or franchise stumbles...r u serious friend? The uncontrollable part is the spin, the frenzy and media stopping itself. It's all around us, week to week: take a up and coming food chef who builds a successful fan base and business model and then watch them topple and fall. No mercy; just scorn. What is new about that?
re: Dimbo
The control that FN has on the 'Paula Deen' brand depends on what is written in their contract. I've read that earlier FN contracts did not give the network control over things like branding products, though they have tried in recent years to get more revenue from such things. I don't know where PD's contract fits.
As an example of this branding 'freedom', in 2008 Emeril sold his 'Lagasse brand' to Martha Stewart. This 2011 article on Emeril's business empire illustrates the complexity of celebrity branding: http://money.cnn.com/2011/10/24/small...
I doubt if FN owns Paula Deen in any real sense; they are just one of many entities that she has contracts with. The drug company, or its advertising agency is just the latest addition.
As a further example, FN owns Bourdain's first show, A Cooks Tour, which they are repeating on CC. Bourdain is described as Travel Channel's top star, but does that mean they own him and his brand? And now TC is owned by Scripts, the same company that owns FN and CC. So Paula and Tony are sister 'brands'. But Paula is free to go off on her own speaking tours and cruises, and Tony his.
re: pikawicca
FxxK'n careers
re: pikawicca
My thoughts exactly.......... the passing of the torch.....
re: pikawicca
Now everyone understands why her son is launching a show to recreate her HIGH FAT UNHEALTHY meals. After bragging how deeeeelish butter is, and how she loads it on because she loves it, is she still eating these horrible high fat meals which promote life threatening diseases like diabetis DUH...
I think Paula Deen is an extremely talented cook, and has come a long way in her life with her boys, but having diabetis this long and not exposing it until now just to make more $$ another way is unforgiveable, I think she will lose a lot of fans because of this. It really is too bad!!! I guess money really does TALK.
re: JulieAtt
I bet her fans rally around her chanting Paula, Paula, Paula we love you, pass the gravy.
For Kerr, it was his wife's stroke and heart attack, more so than his own accident that triggered the change in cooking message. There was also a religious conversion in there. And he's been a darling of foodies ever since :)
Who is your favorite 'healthy-message' cooking show host?
re: breadchick
thanks for the correction paulj and breadchick. Kerr did the admirable and honorable thing. Deen kept a nasty secret that could hurt her brand until she found a way to make a buck shilling pills to cure thee.
Has she not learned, that you cannot buy your way into heaven?
re: Bellachefa
Doesn't this friggin' E-Z toll pass on my windshield get me there?
re: rozz01
so I'm buying me a stairway to heaven?
re: Bellachefa
How often has PD fried butter? The FN 'recipe' for fried butter balls has comments dating from 2006, from a show with this blurb:
"It's no secret that Paula's favorite ingredient is butter! Paula shares her recipes for Chicken Scaloppini with a Lemon Butter Sauce, Savory Cheddar Shortbread, and Double Chocolate Gooey Butter Cake and an audience request, Fried Butter."
Have you noticed any change in her recipes in shows that were produced in the last 3 years? FN probably plays 3-4 old reruns to every new(ish) one. Has anyone actually seen this episode?
re: Withnail42
I thought her endorsement deal was from Butterball?
Hypocrisy and self-justification reign supreme!
Disgusting, dim-witted "White Trash Cooking" that's helped push just shy of 10% of Americans into diabetes. If FN execs had any conscience at all, they'd cancel Deen's programs as a public service and let her carry on in Informercial Hell.
re: Kagemusha
I used to have a cookbook with the title 'White Trash Cooking.' I think it had less butter than PD's recipes. Well, they probably used margarine. Or oleo.
re: Kagemusha
What's with the outrage? I don't see any hypocrisy. Eliminate the emotional element and this is nothing more than a business decision that she feels gives her the best economic outcome. She's a businesswoman, who has used her aw-shucks image to her benefit, but she's never claimed to be anything more than that to my knowledge. I can't say that shilling for Novo Nordisk is the best long-term decision, for as we can see already, the backlash has started and potentially her more profitable route would have been to re-image herself as the healthy Southern chef. Hypocrisy? Not really. Unethical? I would argue not. Open herself up to ridicule and deservedly so? Absolutely. But I can't really fault her for taking the millions... And to say that her or any other "White Trash Cooking" has pushed anyone to diabetes is ridiculous. I'm sick of how there is such a limited sense of personal responsibility. Anyone who says "Paula Deen made me do it" is pathetic. And if not Paula Deen, then it wouuld have been McDonalds or something else unhealthy. I think it's pretty obvious from what she's making that it's probably not the healthiest cuisine to eat on a daily basis, but I'm guessing as an occasional thing, it's probably fine to eat. But that could be said about fast food, pizza, and Per Se, for that matter.
I get the mocking. She deserves it for being a shill. But to make a grander social statement beyond that, I just don't get.
re: FattyDumplin
Yes, we can all be businesspeople. But we should conduct business within some ethical constraints.
Here she's trying to look noble, promoting health.
While she's been shoveling out fat and promoting disease.
She can be a businessperson. But we can reject her style of business.
re: karykat
And it just isn't the shovelling out fat and promoting disease, its the current promotion of the medication to deal with the disease she's encouraged in others. "Buy my book, cook my food, and when you get sick, buy my pill to help you feel better"...weird...
re: FattyDumplin
She's turned herself into a lifestyle brand similar to Martha Stewart, an example for people to follow. Did she stuff krispy kreme hamburgers down anyone's throat? No, but I'd argue she's an enabler, like the guy who takes his alcoholic friend to a bar to watch the football game and says a couple sips won't hurt you.
re: chezwhitey
I guess I'm not prone to fall for celebrity, so maybe I just don't pick up on it. I get that Martha Stewart is someone to emulate - she seems smart, well-spoken, decorates well, etc. But I look at Paula Dean and I don't really see the qualities of someone whose lifestyle I'd want to emulate. She's pretty overweight, as is her husband, so if the massive quantities of butter, sugar and cheese weren't enough of a giveaway, I have a visual of what her food can do to someone. She's kind of a buffoon. As far as I can tell, she's never really sold herself as someone you want to copy.
Look, I get what she's doing at a minimum raises an eyebrow. I just think saying it's "unethical" or hammering her decision is a bit overboard. She has a cooking show where she makes southern food, which by nature tends to be greasy, sugary (i know she takes it to another level), but when eaten in moderation won't kill you. More importantly, it's not like she's in your face saying, eat this, it's good for you - I don't think she's ever represented that her food is healthy, has she?
re: FattyDumplin
I don't think it's unethical to peddle unhealthy food. I guess.
The part that I think is wrong is knowing you have a disease likely/possibly brought on by your cooking and then continuing to promote and profit from that cooking. Knowing it is likely contributing to health problems of others.
And then further profiting from a medication promotion after your cooking (from which you have profited) has likely/possibly brought it on in others is really over the top.
She obviously has the right to say and do whatever she likes (as long as its not outright illegal).
But the rest of us don't have to like it. And can label it for what it is: profiting from promoting unhealthy living and then hypocrisy.
re: karykat
Agreed. Look, the businessperson side of me says she's done an amazing job building her business. And if she was really so cunning as to wait 3 years until she landed her drug endorsement and give her son time to transition into the "healthy alternative" for Paula Deen, that's pretty damn good business sense.
But, the person in me, who can't detach emotionally from these types of things, says she is a total slimeball and I hate it. As much as I preach personal responsibility, it does kind of sicken me that she built her career on fatty, unhealthy food and kept it secret and is now a pitchperson for the curing drug, because in reality, some people just don't know better than to follow her example.
I do hope that she has learned a lesson and that regardless of whether she is being paid or not, she becomes a spokesperson for eating and living healthy. But hte cynic in me is doubtful given the stories I've read about her, i.e. refusing to sign autographs for kids at events and generally seeming to be a not very nice person under that sunny, bubbly facade.
re: FattyDumplin
People like you and me, we obviously know better and wouldn't try to emulate this sort of buffoonery. Sadly, there are a lot of people in our country who do want to be like "mike" or Paula. I hate to say this, but you are overestimating the intelligence of a large portion of society. They see an overweight woman making these sorts of dishes and think it's ok to eat that way, think it's ok to be unhealthy and overweight. I'm not trying to slam overweight people, but many of them don't realize the long term consequences of their lifestyle choices and see someone like Deen as a role model. Believe me, there are a lot of people looking for an excuse to live like slobs. The thing about her "moderation" comment is, is this possible? I don't know about you, but if I were to make one of those recipes, I'd have a hard time eating a couple of bites and calling it a day, which is part of the reason I don't cook those sorts of recipes.
re: chezwhitey
Paula isn't a nutritionist or dietitian, and makes no claim to being one as far as I can tell. She's a TV chef, so her job basically boils down to sharing recipes and how to cook the food she is known for. It's up to the viewer to decide whether or not to cook the recipes, and how often, if ever, to eat them.
Moderation is always possible. Eating in moderation doesn't mean that you can't enjoy a rich, over the top meal once in a while. As the quote goes (which I've seem attributed to both Oscar Wilde and Mark Twain) "Everything in moderation, including moderation". There's nothing wrong with eating a couple pieces of fried chicken, some collard greens cooked up with ham hocks, mashed potatoes swimming in butter, and corn bread cooked up in a skillet lined with bacon grease - just treat meals like that as a special occasion indulgence, and throw in some lower calorie fare in between. If you need to keep to a 2,500 calorie per day diet to maintain your weight there's nothing wrong with having a 5,000 calorie day, just follow it up with a few 1,500 calorie days and it all evens out.
re: chezwhitey
Trust me, I don't overestimate the intelligence of society :) But just like I don't fault McDonalds for making people unhealthy, I can't really blame Paula. I like to have my occasional junk food, so things like McDonalds / Paula serve a purpose in society and shouldn't be lambasted for offering a useful service just because some people can't control themselves or don't have the intelligence to.
re: FattyDumplin
I like my junk food too.
I don't know if I would call promoting it a useful service tho.
Maybe some people can't control themselves or don't have the education to.
But should people profit from that lack of education when it is hurting people?
I guess people like Paula can do that. But should that be considered good?
If it's hurting people?
re: karykat
I like a beer or a glass of bourbon every now and again, yet many people can not control their alcohol intake and have their lives ruined by it, so should brewers, wineries, and distilleries not be able to make a profit from their products that hurt some people?
People have known smoking is dangerous and bad for your health for decades, yet every day new people take up the habit. I don't begrudge anyone their choice to start smoking, as the information about the negative effects is not only readily available but almost impossible to ignore. Similarly, you have to try mighty hard not to see all of the information out there that links being overweight to heart disease, diabetes, and a whole host of other illnesses. It's also common knowledge at this point that eating and abundance of high fat, high carb, sugar laden food will lead to gaining weight. If someone still chooses to overindulge in that fare, it's their right to do so, but to say that they don't know it's bad for them implies that they are being willfully ignorant.
re: TuteTibiImperes
Alcohol and tobacco are highly addictive depending on personalty. So too is food. Food addiction is very real. The difference is that alcohol, and drugs are highly regulated by the government with lots of attention to the potential deleterious effects. Food addiction has not been covered in the same light as the other areas. It's not that simple for many people to just put down a hamburger and go with a salad. There are addictive properties in high fat foods that are well documented. Why do we perceive them to taste so good? Heck you could even make an argument that high calorie foods served an evolutionary purpose in the hunter gatherer days which selectively chose this trait of enjoying high cal foods in the population. I don't want to go too much into that because there is a bit of speculation. What isn't speculation is that people are indeed addicted to high fat high cal food. People who smoke and drink know that this is not good for their bodies either but they still do it because of addiction. Look, I'm not exonerating other chefs and personalities either except to say PD having diabetes and concealing it is especially galling and the reason I'm being so harsh with her compared to others. The fact that she now endorses an anti-diabetic therapeutic is even more crass and worthy of us tearing her a new one. I don't buy for one second she didn't know what to do, she didn't do anything because she didn't want to hurt her brand, which I get it, she's a business woman, but g*ddamn, is there a soul inside of her?
re: chezwhitey
Well, she did have an affair with a married man for many yrs. ( not telling tales out of school, this is in HER book )
So I can only conclude from that and this recent situation that maybe she doesn't have a care in the world or feels any responsabilty for her actions, as long as she is getting what she wants.
re: karykat
"Maybe some people can't control themselves or don't have the education to."
I would say some people have stronger desire to cosume junk foods, but certainly not to the point of "cannot control". There are stronger data to support people "cannot" control themselves from committing crimes than people cannot control themselves from eating junk foods.
Still, I am willing to give you that some people have stronger desire than others to eat junk foods. I don't think education is an issue at all. Everyone knows the relationship between fatty foods and health. This has been known for thousands of years prior to any modern science. We always know this. To say people do not "know" fatty and high calories foods can cause health problem is like saying people do not "know" lack of water causes dehydration. Some information are so basic that you don't even need modern science to know, like drink sufficient water, sleep sufficient numbers of hours, do not overeat.... We may ignore it, but it is not due to lack of education. Sometime I don't sleep enough. Sometime I work late, other times I just watch TV, but it isn't because I wasn't educated. Do I really need to take a class to know sleeping sufficient hours is good for me?
re: Chemicalkinetics
Education can be a problem, especially when lobbyists are trying to classify ketchup as a vegetable serving in schools. In adults, it may not be a question of education so much as it is of having a permissive society when it comes to unhealthy lifestyles and obesity.
re: chezwhitey
The influence of 'Big Ag' over what goes into school lunches is unfortunate. I do believe that schools should spend some time teaching nutrition from elementary school up, and serve well prepared food that's both tasty and nutritious as part of the school lunch program so that children whose parents may not cook that way at home, or cook at all, can at least be exposed to a healthy diet.
As far as adults go, the reason I don't see Paula's actions as wrong is that PD is not in any way controlling what anyone eats. Are sugary, fatty, salty foods tasty? Absolutely, and yes, our bodies are programmed to crave those flavors because evolutionarily they were harder to find in nature. Even going back one hundred years, which is less than a blink of an eye in terms of evolution, a hearty breakfast of biscuits, ham, eggs, and jam wouldn't have been a bad thing if it was followed by a hard day's work of manual labor on the farm or in a factory. Obviously society has evolved a lot faster than our bodies, and we don't need to gobble up every bit of sugar, fat, and salt we can get our hands on any more than we need to start reproducing as soon as our bodies reach sexual maturity. Still, the cravings for both energy rich foods and the hormonal drive to mate are present. With all of that out of the way, PD isn't telling people to eat only her food, to eat large portions of her food, or to eat it every day. Personal responsibility has to come into play.
There are plenty of chefs out there who cook healthy food and endorse healthy lifestyles. I'm guessing that the same people who are avid PD fans are not also fans of Dr. Oz or Jillian Michaels. PD endorsing this medication will bring a face that people who actually need it will recognize. Yes, Paula's cooking can help exacerbate the conditions that the medication is meant to help, but only if that food is abused. We don't need to demonize Paula's cooking or food, because it isn't the problem, and personally I don't think she should change a single one of her recipes. It's easier to say remove the temptation than to learn self control, but there will always be another temptation around the corner, while self control and will power will serve one well throughout life.
As far as society goes, it should be permissive. If it makes you happy to eat small portions of healthy food and spend hours at the gym every day, good for you. If it makes you happy to eat whatever you want when you want it and not so much as lift a barbell, great. The health nut is going to miss out on a lot of great meals, while the glutton will likely spend a few years less on this earth and have a harder time enjoying many physical activities, but if you are willing to accept the consequences of your lifestyle, I don't have a problem with it.
re: TuteTibiImperes
It's a fine line between personal liberty and laws that are designed to protect you from yourself. I understand if someone wants to be gluttonous so be it, the problem I have is that these habits are often passed down to the offsprings. There are so many people that don't know how to feed their children, hence the alarming rates of childhood obesity. Where PD lies in all of this is certainly subjective, but in my opinion, the way this has played out with her announcement coupled to the endorsement of the drugs sends a message to her fans that says, it's ok to destroy your body like I did, there's always a pill to bail you out. The bottom line is that her lifestyle and the permissiveness of it affects you and me directly by making our health insurance costs sky rocket, not to mention contributing to the bankrupting of our government, much of which could be prevented through simple education and personal responsibility by not just common folk like us, but by people like PD who are in a position of great influence.
re: FattyDumplin
Hear hear. To my knowledge, she never sold her cooking as health food. The woman deep fried cheesecake and served it with chocolate syrup and whipped cream. She's not peddling misinformation. She's selling food. And she's selling it as food that tastes good, period. And her food sells. Whatever her personal medical story is is completely beside the point.
re: Savour
Pardon the bad pun but here's some food for thought.
Look at the map of the US and watch how the trend of obesity changes as we go from 1985 to 2010. Now think about the dangers of glamorizing people who promote unhealthy lifestyles and exonerating them from any moral culpability.
re: chezwhitey
That is one truly frightening map. Yikes!
re: gaffk
Check out the maps specific to adults with diagnosed diabetes,
re: souvenir
I'm moving to Colorado.
re: gaffk
I guess I shouldn't have been surprised, but I was. I know that obesity in this country has reached "epidemic levels" but to see the progression laid out like that was quite shocking. I'm from Connecticut and wasn't THAT surprised to see that we were 2nd (I think) for the lowest obesity rate, despite what I see every day.
re: kubasd
Ah, but look how the county data shows the differences between Fairfield and Litchfield compared to the rest of the state. Hartford County, with all the insurance money, isn't doing so bad either. And where people are poorest Wyndham (oh yes, there is rural poverty in CT. Who knew?), they are the fattest.
The folks who get up in arms saying that this is simply a matter of choice, of willpower, are obliterated by the data. Don't you just love science?
Also notice the point at which CT starts plumping up. I'd say it has a lot to do with the economy. People have less money and become more stressed. We can't afford the same food that We were eating before, can't afford to go to the market as often as we did because CT is a car-driving suburban state with crap-all for mass transit. And stressed, we look to comfort themselves with high carb, high fat comfort foods.
Except, as the numbers show us, in Fairfield County where so many of those bankers who got richer than god by raping the rest of us live. They're doing fine.
re: PipentaCereal
OMG.............well said!
re: chezwhitey
Still completely unrelated to her diabetes. And "promoting unhealthy lifestyles" can be said of 90% of celebrities. I think there are a lot more things to blame for the rise in obesity than the popularity of the food network. (government agricultural policies, rise in sedentary service industry jobs, national workaholic culture, the "diet" industry ...)
re: Savour
Agree with most of what you said, but not this "national workaholic culture"... You think we are more workaholic than other countries in the world?
re: Chemicalkinetics
Yes. The GNP per capita in the US is widely envied and examined around the world, and the hours worked by Americans is regarded as the principal differentiator. American workers do not enjoy European- style 6 week holidays.
re: Veggo
Most of the world population is in China and India. I know people in those countries work crazy long hours. Indians often work 6 days a week as opposed to 5 days a week. More importantly, the average work hours of Americans have declined, so I doubt there is a good correlation of our increased diabetes rate to our work hour (more like a reversed relationship).
re: Chemicalkinetics
There has been no mention of a diabetes- work week correlation. Americans work more hours than counterparts in first world countries that would relish the triumph of knocking the US out of first place for GNP per capita, a very telling statistic.
re: Veggo
"There has been no mention of a diabetes- work week correlation"
I was referring to Savour's statement, which appears to suggest obesity or diabetes with national workaholic culture. I think you are talking about something else, which is more about GDP GNP... which is a different topic.
re: Chemicalkinetics
Gotcha, I looked back and found it. I think we are generally in agreement about economics and chemistry, my fields of study. I wish I knew as much as you about knives...:), really, and I enjoy learning here.
re: Chemicalkinetics
No. I'm a nice person. I rent lawyers when I need them.
re: Chemicalkinetics
Maybe that particular point was extrapolation of my own personal situation. I know that the more I work, the less I work out.
re: Savour
Savour, you are right, there are many pieces to the puzzle to explain why our society has become so unhealthy. It's not just FN and PD, but they are a piece of a puzzle and can not be ignored. I'm interested to see how sincere she is about changing the way she presents her food and modifies her recipe.
re: Savour
Her personal medical story is besides the point, I agree. But her desire to make money by pushing people towards the band-aid drug that they need to cope with having eaten so much of her horrendously unhealthy food is a huge problem. I never judged her for having that show, and I always thought individuals need to make their own food choices, but to both promote bad food and then promote a drug to be a band-aid for the health problems that result from said food - making lots of money from both - seems like a gross conflict of interest.
re: FattyDumplin
I simply cannot believe the collective twist people have in their knickers over this whole thing.
Deen made quite a fortune for herself by working her ass off, having come from being flat broke. She indulged in self-parody a lot, and knew that people looked forward to her latest over-the-top creations- did you really think she was serious about the Krispy Kremeburger?
Bourdain called her evil for her food choices. Meanwhile he ate the nearly-raw, unwashed arsehole of a wild boar and then started promoting antiprotozoans and antibiotics of Big Pharmaceuticals. He didn't? Wow, what a farking hero he is.
I can hardly wait for the feeding frenzy when Bourdain comes down with lung, liver, or pancreatic cancer. Dont' forget, he's several years younger than Paula.
re: EWSflash
Wow, Tony got a deal with the pharmaceutical companies to promote antibiotics all. Well golly, I missed that part.
re: PipentaCereal
He didn't. I was making a point.
re: FattyDumplin
FattyDumplin: I see your point in that Deen is a businesswoman. That's fine. However, she is also a public personality. I honestly feel that when someone crosses over the line of private v. public persona, then you have a responsibility to your public. After all, THEY are the ones who put more bread and butter (pun intended) on the Deen table. Deen needs to be more honest with her followers. Bourdain has never made it a secret that he smoked like a chimney and drank like a true drunk. Never. Paula is not stand-up. She may come across as all southern comfy mama, but she is deceitful. She doesn't have to get all "preachy-preachy" about her diabetes or start pontificating about how it should be treated. All she needed to do was say something three years ago when she was first diagnosed. She would not have been the worst for it--in fact, had she researched ways to reconstruct many of her recipes in a healtier way, I'll bet you she would have built up her "fan" base. The only reason she is coming clean now is for endorsement purposes, which is now more opportunistic than Kate Gosslin and her litter of children that brought her to the bank. I hope Ms. Deen's health improves and I hope she quits smoking as well..she seems like a great mom and she should be around long enough to enjoy her grandchild (or children).
re: jarona
"she is also a public personality. I honestly feel that when someone crosses over the line of private v. public persona, then you have a responsibility to your public. "
Why? They don't. Patris Hilton, Britney Spears, Robert Downey Jr. (historically), Elizabeth Taylor, Mel Gibson, Arnold Schwartzenegger, et al didn't feel the call to higher ground, apparently. Maybe they should, but clearly they don't.
re: EWSflash
That's right, they don't. She offers a product to the public, and the public can take it or leave it, but not demand that she behave according to anyone else's standard. Whose would it be, anyway? The only responsibility she has is to avoid illegal conduct such as fraud. I don't think she has crossed that line.
re: GH1618
Once a someone proceeds to make claims about products that are intended to be used for medical purposes, she or he takes on a greater responsibility than just avoiding fraud.
The ethical (and legal) obligations of discussing medications are different than the obligations of discussing, say, cosmetics.
re: EWSflash
EWSflash. The people you mention are not cooking food on a tv show. Hilton, Spears and Taylor (rip) all use their celebrity to sell cheap perfume. Gibson, Arnold, Robert Downey are movie personalities (although I'm a big fan of Downey--yes. even with his substance issues). Deen is using a disease as an opportunity to shill a diabetic drug and you know what??? I think the most shameful issue really isn't with Deen, but with the makers of the drugs that she is shilling. She will get a big paycheck while others WITHOUT MEDICAL INSURANCE who need this drug cannot afford it and will not be able to get it--but the company would rather pay Deen to shill it. I gotta stop now because I'm just getting upset about the poor souls who are going to go without.
re: jarona
I'm referring to celebrities' lack of feeling reposnsibility to the public in general. Just because you feel they should doesn't mean they feel that way- in afct the opposite is more likely the truth.. "I'm famous. I can do whatever I want."
re: jarona
Oh, and by the way, how is it Deen's fault that the pharmaceutical companies are amoral and greed-obsessed? THAT part especially is not her fault.
re: EWSflash
Sweeping generalization much?
re: GH1618
Not really. I've worked at a hospital for over 40 years. I know who the villains are.
re: FattyDumplin
I agree with you - no one is forcing people to regularly eat Deen's recipes - it's like saying that a show on wines or beers will turn someone into an alcoholic. People are responsible for what they eat, and last I checked Deen was simply a tv cook, not a nutritionist or lifestyle coach.. I am also sick of people saying that Type 2 diabetes is simply the fault of people who have it - obesity is a factor, but not all obese people have it and not all sufferers are obese. I was diagnosed with it when I was 35 and actually underweight (bad genes). Anyhoo - watch her recipes get lighter and her pocketbook get fatter.
re: Kagemusha
Ding, ding, ding. I think that the FN's reaction to all of this is the most interesting part of it; of course we all know that they don't care, though.
re: HillJ
I wonder if there is any difference in the average BMI at PW, PD and a RR book signings. I suppose there might be if PW fans are more likely to come from nearby Colorado, than Mississippi. However I suspect most PW fans only live that active ranch life style vicariously.
I wonder if any of the posters who are criticizing PD actually know any PD fans.
re: paulj
Of course, I was referring to the new FN Pioneer Woman show debuting this month. If you read the PW blog long enough you get a good sense of who her fans are, where they hail from and what pleasure they derive from following her. PW uses many of the recipes PD demonstrates but from a different generational respect. And, PW is already criticised by many for her high fat, butter laden recipes.
re: paulj
Yes. I do. And I'm sure they'd still be overweight and unhealthy in a world void of her. However, maybe not quite so much? what could possibly be the purpose of a donut burger other than to promote gluttony? There's no way that tastes good. I find profiting off a disease you even may have contributed to lacking in taste if not ethics. Then again, I'm a liberal. I find all profiting from Illness reprehensible.
re: silvergirl
I was looking for a video of the episode where Paula makes Lemon Curd Pudding, but couldn't find it. The recipe is here:
I remember this episode which may have aired around the time she discovered she had diabetes but kept hush about it. As I recall, she cackled and bragged about eating a whole pan of the pudding so she had to make another one for her guests. The recipe calls for 2 cups of sugar, 2 cups of half and half and 4 eggs. That's quite a snack.
I then caught a video of the famous Donut Burger show:
Grossness factor aside, what struck me is the attitude "Aw shucks, aren't I just the naughtiest little thing eating a donut burger! Who on earth would do this but lil' ole me?"
I get it. That's her schtick. That's her meal ticket. That's what makes her fans love her. She endorses eating "forbidden trashy food" with reckless abandon.
Now she's having her cake and eating it too. She's not renouncing her recipes, instead she tosses out a word "moderation," and lets her sons Ka and Ching expand their brand, plus they can all enjoy the money they make from shilling pills.
Julia Child didn't make money this way.
Like its been said before ... $$$$$
There's no doubt that foods full of sugar and fat taste great and are easy to overindulge in. But to push those foods while simultaneously pushing a medication designed for people who have a disease created by that overindulgence??? Wow...just...wow...
One hand has the food that creates the disease, the other holds the medication to treat the disease.
Can't say she's left any base uncovered LOLOL
According to straightdope.com, Graham Kerr's conversion was motivated by his wife having had a heart attack:
re: GH1618
Again I appreciate the correction, but the message is the same. He made a choice to transform his brand, when it wasn't even considered an industry term. She chose a less admirable path to expand her brand.
re: Bellachefa
I'm not defending her brand, in which I have no interest, but for well-known persons to become shills for some product or other, even pharmaceuticals, is hardly new. It is what I expect.
Even James Beard, the originator of the cooking show, leveraged his name to sell products, and I have always had high regard for his knowlege of food and cooking.
re: GH1618
And that nearly ruined James Beard. Le Seur canned peas.
obesity and family genetics lead to Type 2 diabetes. Dean has never been obese i dont think. her cooking style is more dangerous to the heart. any way, not as though she is FORCING anyone to do anything
re: MarkG
I think she's had a history of weight issues, and if you google her image, you'll see that she definitely has a BMI over 30. Even with a genetic component (family member has it, or in a high risk ethic group), the most effective way to prevent or delay of type 2 Diabetes onset is to control the fat and sugar in your diet, control your cholesterol, get to and maintain a healthy body weight, and exercise. The type of cooking she promotes doesn't really fall in line with these guidelines, and given that the style of cooking she promotes is Southern Comfort Classics, as in recipes handed down from generation to generation and made in the average Southern home, there really is no consideration of the impact of her recipes on the average person. I wonder about the link between this dietary habit and the obesity and diabetes rates in the Southern United States...I suspect there's a link between the two for Ms Deen. I personally don't/won't eat her food. I'm sure I'm missing out on some really tasty food, but my butt and waistline can't withstand that kind of onslaught.
re: freia
James Beard had weight "issues," as did many other well-known cooks such as Paul Prudhomme. The fact is, good cooks like food and they like butter. I like butter myself, and have to reconcile that with my need to keep my weight down.
I don't think we should pick on people for being a little overweight. Many Americans are, and some of them are cooks worthy of respect. It is the food that matters on this website.
re: GH1618
I don't have any issue with her weight or her personal medical status. Or the food she cooks. What bugs me personally is the link between selling her brand based on high fat high sugar ingredients on one hand (thus promulgating a health issue) then shilling for a diabetes medication. Its the link between the two.
I kind of see it like a tobacco company that decides to market a brand of chemotherapy for lung cancer. It is the link between the two.
It may have been a better PR move for her to become a volunteer spokesperson for the American Diabetic Association or something? Or to just not reveal it at all? She's kind of made this our business with her current PR tour and with announcing this as part of a marketing strategy for her diabetes lifestyle based company and medication promotion?
re: GH1618
James Beard didn't have countless cookbooks and/or several TV shows on air 24/7. Food and cooking were perceived completely differently when James Beard was doing his thing. There was little to no exposure to "celebrity chefs". The average person didn't have a clue as to who James Beard was. I'd hazard a guess that you can ask anyone on the street in most cities in the U.S., and 85% of them will have heard the name Paula Deen.
To compare the exposure that Beard had to what Deen has now is apples to artichokes.
re: LindaWhit
I believe you are mistaken. Beard was quite prolific as a writer of cookbooks and articles about food. In the 1950s he was quite well known. Food and cooking are perceived differently today in the US because Beard led the way, hosted the first televised cooking show, and helped Julia Child get established. She, of course, was much more successful on television than he, but they were the "celebrity chefs" of their day (although neither was a chef). Not many people remember Beard today only because he is long dead and because cooking programs have proliferated.
But that history is beside the point. The point is merely that Beard, though a serious epicure, nevertheless used his name to sell products beyond merely cookbooks. Child was unique, I think, in not making product endorsements.
re: GH1618
I'm fully aware of Beard's pedigree. But I'm not comparing to people on the street knowing both Deen vs. Beard *now*. I'm saying fewer people on the street in Beard's day would have know of him as those on the street now who would be aware of Paula Deen.
re: LindaWhit
Only because the population is larger.
re: GH1618
Again - it's all about exposure. The proliferation of cooking shows allows for more to know about her. Her "brand" is better known because of the reach of television and the Internet.
re: GH1618
I don't agree w/ picking on someone for his/her size but let's be honest about it either way. Paula Deen is not just "a little overweight." I saw part of one of her specials when she said people would ask her about her use of butter, etc. and she cackled, "Well, I ain't your nurse!" Fine, but now she wants to be and is selling drugs to be healthier so hopefully, she'll be a better example. I don't care what she did in the past but now that she's shilling for a drug company, she should walk the walk.
re: chowser
walk what walk?
re: Chemicalkinetics
Walk the walk of being a healthy person who is controlling her diabetes.
re: chowser
It's her life and she gets to do with it what she wants... There are as many different approaches to treating/coping with diabetes as there are diabetics, from total denial all the way to the Emergency Room, to fanaticism. Right now she's using a medical approach, and we'll get to see how well that works for her. While it would be NICE if she started modifying her recipes to make them a bit healthier, it's her choice not ours.
re: Kajikit
She can do what she wants and I have no problems with it but when she advocates something for the general public, then it becomes public. It would be like an alcoholic preaching moderation in drinking for other alcoholics.
re: chowser
...while endorsing a vodka brand for reimbursement....
re: Kajikit
PD is rolling out revised recipes. She demo'd her lasagna with GF pasta, FF cheeses etc, lean meat etc.
Might just maybe be too little too late.
re: monavano
It'll be interesting to see what reaction her rabid following has to this. My guess is they won't like it so much.
re: monavano
I haven't studied all her new recipes, but I saw lightened breaded chicken fingers (with flour and sugar added), lightened sweet and sour meatballs (with ketchup, bread crumbs, and brown sugar). Referencing what you mentioned above, GF has nothing to do with sugar free, FF has nothing to do with sugar free. Sure, those things might be better than the original recipes, but if she really wants to help diabetics, she'd make recipes without sugar, without breading, without ketchup, etc. I would NEVER have asked her to act as a dietician or nutritionist before, but if she wants to cash in on the medical side of this disease and start telling diabetics what to eat, then I think her "healthy" recipes should actually start resembling something that is GOOD for people, rather than less-bad-than-what-she-used-to-make.
re: MiriamWoodstock
Studies have demonstrated that replacing fats with starches and sugar make them worse for you, not less bad. Metabolically speaking, measuring post meal results on markers.
Those changes don't just fail to improve them enough, they made them more unhealthy.
re: chezwhitey
I make a strong distinction between high quality vs. low quality fats. I avoid transfats and fats from feedlot raised animals. There is nothing wrong with saturated fats from healthy sources, such as pastured animals. I use plenty of saturated fats in my diet from dairy and meat, mostly grass fed. There was a recent meta study finding after reviewing many studies' data, there is no increased CVD risk for saturated fat. If you're worried about it, stick to monounsaturates. But be aware that olive oil has some saturates, and even feed lot beef gets more than half its fat from mono and poly unsaturates.
re: MiriamWoodstock
Referencing what you mentioned above, GF has nothing to do with sugar free
and in fact, GF starches are even worse for diabetics because of the greater glycemic impact. the woman needs a nutritionist.
re: chowser
I don't believe she has been obese for her entire life. I recall seeing photos of her in her youth where she was quite comely in a Marilyn Monroe fashion. Also, when she first started showing up on Doorknock Dinners she wasn't nearly as big as she has been in the past few years. So yes, I agree her style has lead to her problems.
re: rainey
She certainly meets the clinical definition of "obese."
re: pikawicca
Perhaps so, but I was just comparing a picture of her to an old picture of Paul Prudhomme. He was in a different weight class altogether. He didn't get nearly as much criticism for it (or as mean-spirited criticism) for two reasons: 1. His food is better; 2. He is male.
re: GH1618
I remember him as the celebrity chef who does not stand.
re: Chemicalkinetics
A doctor I knew was a friend of his. Chef Paul has had a bad hip for a long time, but due to his obesity he's a poor surgical candidate.
re: EWSflash
Oh....good to know. I did not know this. I thought he was just too heavy to move.
re: GH1618
I'll buy #1; I don't think it's clear in any way that she's being singled out for her gender. But you also have to factor in that she's been an advocate for the kind of cooking that led to her affliction. As I remember, Prudhomme put himself on the map with blacked fish. NOT the same deal.
Meanwhile, Prudhomme has taken his health seriously and lost a ton of weight.
re: rainey
I noted elsewhere that he lost a lot of weight. PD should lose some also, if she's going to represent treatment for diabetes. If she doesn't, the relationship may not last long. I am reminded of Kirstie Alley representing Weight Watchers.
re: GH1618
Jenny Craig, actually.
re: GH1618
Paul Prudhomme as most other celebrity cooks didn't publicly put so much food in their mouth that they looked like pigs and wanted the world to think "Look how cut is this.
Paula sells herself as one cutesy overweight cook who loves her fans, she doesn't care or is concerned about anyone, not even her own state of health, she has said she is not changing her recipes so as long as she can cackle herself to the bank with their money she will continue with her irresponsible lifestyle until diabetes breaks down her health and lifestyle.
I am sorry I am so angry at this woman, but I have diabetes "don't blame her for it" but know it is nothing to take lightly. It is so painful, takes so much away from your life, ruins every aspect of a person's health, to include eyesight, amputation, etc., and for her who is in the public eye and could make a difference to so many people, educated or not, yet she continues to take it so lightly is just plain wrong. I hope her popularity sinks before her health does.
re: hueyishere
No you don't.
re: GH1618
Paula is in your face about it. Ina Garten doesn't take the same flak.
She was on the Chew today and said she didn't come forward because she felt that she had nothing to offer until now. She said that when she is dead she wants to be remembered as someone who represented hope for diabetics.
The whole episode was one giant enabling session with PD and her sons plugging everything from Novo Nortis (both sons are also paid reps for NN) and their restaurant to her show on FN and the two new shows the sons will be hosting.
It was an icky spectacle to say the least.
re: EM23
If she had just come out and said "Y'all, you know what, I've been eatin' like crap and now I have diabetes -- but I'm gonna come up with new ideas to make that bad food good for ya'" I would've respected the timing. But to coincide with the drug release and to not take responsibility that her food has a linkage to bad health is in...poor taste.
re: Reignking
I think people are annoyed with the perceived dichotomy between her having the good fortune to land a gig selling drugs for diabetes despite her brand of unhealthy cooking which remained unchanged in the 3 years since her diagnosis.
She needs a better spin doctor.
re: paulj
Doesn't look like it. Frankly, her recipes are worse than what I thought they would be. From 2009, a rice dish calling for 1 stick of butter to 2 cups of rice and a broccoli cole slaw recipe that somehow calls for 3/4 of a stick of butter - WTH???
From 2011, a recipe for baked mac & cheese that is then wrapped in bacon, dipped in flour, egg and breadcrumbs and then fried in oil. Also from 2011, a roasted fingerling potato recipe that calls for a lb. of bacon.
And from 2012, an English pea salad that calls for 4 slices of bacon, a cup of cheddar and 3 tbsps. of mayo. All over the top and there are any more similar examples. You can search for recipes by cook and date range on the FN site if you want to have a look for yourself.
re: Bellachefa
'English peas' is a regional name for 'green peas'.
re: EM23
A couple are 2009 recipes, the rest are earlier.
The earliest comments on the fried mac are from 2007. Doesn't the 'ladys' part of the name imply it is an adaptation of her restaurant dish? Trader Joes has some sort of fried mac-n-cheese balls.
Oxtail and rice - earliest comments 2005
broccoli cole slaw with butter fried ramen noodles (2006)
3lb potato roasted with 1lb bacon (2009). Who is Dustin Wall, the guest who presents this recipe? Clearly PD approves of the recipe, but the level of bacon use is not her innovation.
pea salad (2009) - the proportions don't look too bad to me. In this case the bacon is drained and the fat is not used. If I made it, I'd eyeball things, using more or less so it appeared and tasted right. None of the comments have problems with that amount of bacon or mayo. Some even add more. Several were reminded of old recipes.
re: paulj
Aw crap - now I feel compelled to search for more of her unhealthy recipes - maybe tomorrow. But now I know that the FN search function sucks - good work on the catch paulj. Their search function brought up all of those recipes as having aired during the last 3 years and I never thought to look at the comments. I took the date FN listed as the original date - lesson learned.
But about the pea recipe - I like peas as a side as much as the next guy. And, truth be told, I have been known to add lardons to my holiday peas - delicious. But mayo and cheddar on peas on top of the bacon is seriously rich - why? Do you hate your veg that much? This is a side dish in a PD menu that includes meatloaf, mac& cheese and Toffee Gooey Butter Cake. And this "It's All in the Family" menu is described as "a perfect home-cooked meal" in the episode blurb:
'Paula's son, Jamie, joins her in the kitchen for a perfect home-cooked meal... It's a mouthwatering Meatloaf inspired by Jamie's wife, a delicious Tomato Mac and Cheese and English Pea Salad. And last but not least - it's a Deen family favorite - good ol' gooey ooey butter cakes with a toffee twist. Make no mistake about the secret to a great meal, it's all in the family."
BTW, that ooey gooey cake calls for a package of yellow cake mix, 8 oz. of cream cheese, 3 large eggs, 1 pound of confectioners sugar and 2 sticks of butter.
Who is Dustin Wall? Someone that PD is ok with posting their recipe under her name it seems. 1 lb. of bacon to roast 3 lbs. of potatoes is just silly.
re: GH1618
Curiosity, plain and simple.
Why read a thread about PD if one is "detached"?
re: EM23
Why? Curiosity, plain and simple.
I'm "detached" in the sense that I find PD no more outrageous than a lot of other people promoting one thing or another. What is of greater concern to me than what PD peddles and when, is the apparently large number of people willing to eat it up, figuratively and literally. If enough people want it, someone will sell it to them.
re: GH1618
"What is of greater concern to me than what PD peddles and when, is the apparently large number of people willing to eat it up..."
As the great philosopher Paul Weller wrote "and the public wants what the public gets".
re: GH1618
I agree with your view. Every celebrity chefs/cooks promote one thing or another. You may or may not agree with their promotion, but that is completely beside the point of the right to promotion.
re: Chemicalkinetics
I agree but I also think if Mario Batali were to become spokesperson for Manolo's, he'd better get rid of the orange crocs or he'll take a lot of flak for that, too.
re: chowser
Sure, with that analogy, all Paula Deen has to do is to take the drug to promote the drug. She does not have to change her cooking style or her own eating habit. Keep in mind that many diabetic patients take the medication without changing their lifestyles. Not just diabetes... take heart diseases... many people underwent heart surgery and still eat crap. It is not an effective strategy, but there is nothing "hypocritic" about it.
No one, including celebrities, is obligated to reveal personal health information. Let's not forget we have very strict laws designed to prevent health information from being shared. It's personal. If a person decides not to share, that's okay.
Deep-fried butter is an interesting treat. Does that cause T2DM? No. Here's food for thought:
A person eats "healthy," but is a cigarette smoker. Is that person healthy?
A 200 lb person eats 1000 calories a day. Is that person healthy?
A person eats Deen's foods, but does so within that person's calorie needs. Is that person healthy?
Respect the privacy of others (especially when it comes to medicine) and realize that food is one of many contributing factors in determining a person's health.
re: ediblover
Happy to respect her privacy, but she IS the one who brought it up specifically to market a website and to be a spokesperson for a diabetes medication company.
No one knew for 3 years, until she made it known.
She wasn't outed, she outed herself. She clearly wants it in the public area at this moment for financial reasons, having successfully concealed this information (and having respect for her medical privacy) for some 3 years.
Money talks, and medical information walks from her own mouth, so to speak...
re: freia
All this does nothing to squeeze Deen Inc.'s cash flow. "Lifestyle" diabetes, heart disease and obesity are incontrovertibly linked to diet. Deen's revolting cuisine is just part of the chum slick that lures suckers to their doom. She's just an apologist for a more accessible form of aspirational excess, in this case eating too much of the wrong thing and pitching it as entitlement or therapy. She's just part of the pathology.
re: Kagemusha
You got it! "Revolting cuisine" indeed. You described her schtick perfectly, laughing all the way to the bank after leading the gullible to the bug zapper.
I don't watch Paula Deen or any particular celebrity chefs, especially Oprah (she is a celebrity expert on everything).
Anyway, I certainly do not believe in deep frying in butter is a good thing. Once or twice is probably ok, but deep fry in anything should not be a regular diet.
What I don't understand is the premise. Let's say we know deep frying food is unhealthy diet. Why does it matter if I have diabetes or not? So it is better prescribe people to deep fry food if I don't have diabetes? A person should able to keep his health record as private -- unless he/she is running in public office. Deen can do what she does with her health record. If you don't think so, then at least be fair, and we should demand all celebrity chefs to release their annual blood work exam results.
re: Chemicalkinetics
Pushing food styles known to promote ill health then offering a medical solution at the same time is the issue. It isnt the issue of her health status. And dont' forget, she outed herself for profit, coinciding her announcement with a website and spokesperson duties for a diabetes company and with a national news show tour.
Like I said before, this is no different to me than a tobacco company selling cigarettes and then promoting a brand of chemotherapy for lung cancer.
re: Chemicalkinetics
I think it's become a problem because Paula is now a spokesperson for a drug company. I've said this before but if she wants to eat deep fried butter until she's in her grave, that's her business but when she's put herself out there as a successful person fighting diabetes, the drug company is going to care. And, let's be honest, celebrities do have an influence on people. If her shilling for diabetes drugs will affect sales, so did her pushing deep fried butter.
re: chowser
And I'll bet you the drug company is completely stoked, as she is through her actions promoting the view that nothing has to change if you have diabetes, all you do is take the medication. Factually that is wrong as the side effects of diabetes Type 2 will catch up with you regardless of the medication you take if you don't change your lifestyle. But think about it from the drug company's POV -- we have a spokesperson who says nothing needs to change, and actively promotes a diet and lifestyle that will create more clients for our drug product, which our spokesperson ALSO actively promotes!!!!
Shady, shady, shady all the way around, IMHO
re: chowser
"celebrities do have an influence on people. "
Yes, but so can we say about Pair Hilton and Kardashian who have much higher profile and greater influence.
re: Chemicalkinetics
Sure but neither of them are openly diabetic and marketing for a drug company. If Paris Hilton were advertising for the importance of frugality, I'd expect her to cut back. If Kim were arguing for the sanctity of marriage, I'd expect her to try to stay married.
re: chowser
I don't know if you read my other comment about just up above -- about the separation of the drug and lifestyle. Paula Deens is not arguing that she is a role model for diabetic patients, and I doubt anyone mistaking her for that, like you are not mistaking Kim to be a role model for marriage. Kim does say she has good taste in fashion.
Presumably, Paula is being a spokewoman for the effectiveness of a drug, which is not the same as being a spokewoman of diabetic lifestyle and diet. In fact, from a scientific testing point of view, the efficacy of a drug is best shown for subjects with poor diets than subjects with good diets. Think about this for a few seconds. This is another topic.
You can be a spokeman for a health lifestyle agency without being a spokeman for a drug company, and vice versa. These are different topics. Clearly, one would argue it is best to have a lifestyle change and stay on a good medication to control the insulin insensitivity, I agree with that, but again, one does not have to be a spokeman/role model for both. If I am not mistaken, you somehow imply/suggest that Paula has to change her food diet before she is qualify to ADVOCATE a drug. Now, would you say she has to also change her diet before she is allowed to TAKE the drug? If not, then I ask you this: why cannot a person who TAKE a drug ADVOCATE a drug?
Would you have a problem if a celebrity being an advocater for lifestyle change for diabetes (while not taking medication)? Or do they must go together?
re: Chemicalkinetics
She is profiting from promoting a drug after her food lifestyle (from which she profited) arguably/likely/probably created the need for it.
And, the part that really bothers me, she continued to promote that lifestyle knowing she had this disease and that others were getting this disease from her food lifestyle as well.
re: karykat
A lot of people sell "nich" things. I do not see that as unethnical. If I tune into a show about barbecue, then I will see a lot of meat. If I grab a book about making dessert, then I will see a lot of sugar and butter. She is selling her things. I don't think she claims things which are not to be true. She does not say "eat my foods to prevent diabetes". Frankly, I see many infomercial with celebrities selling things which are false, and I don't see the same level of anger. Remember the "cleansing colon pills"? I can name many products with unproven health claims yet with proven health risks.
Think of it this way, what if a pastry/dessert chef get diabete? Should he/she stop making desserts? Some ice cream founders have health problems. With this logic, Irvine Robbins should stop selling ice cream and shut down Baskin Robbins, so do Ben & Jerry's.
This is a point I bought up earlier: somehow many people "unintentional" suggest that only healthy people should sell/promote unhealthy foods. You can sell ice cream and dessert as long as you are not overweight and do not have diabetes, but once you have them, then you need to stop selling them. We can have thin pastry chefs, but fat pastry chefs need to find another job.
re: karykat
Let's me round this out. Let me first say that many of Paula Deens recipes are not very healthy; in fact unhealthy. That being said, we also have to admit there are plenty unhealthy foods around too. So let me highlight some of the points.
1) Are we saying that unhealthy foods should not be aired on TV or published on popular magazines? Like many Paula Deens recipes and many other people recipes. If so, this is an entirely different situation, and her diabetic state has no role in it.
2) Can an unhealthy person sell/prompt unhealthy foods? Legally of course, they can, but is it unethical? Can a fat person makes sweet fatty pastry? Or should pastry chefs be thin. Can a diabetic person drive an ice cream truck? What about those fat McDonald cashiers? These are all unhealthy people who profit from selling unhealthy profilts. Are they being less moral and less ethnical than than thinner and healthier counterparts? In other words, is a fat McDonald employee less moral than a thin McDonald employee, given that the fat person "may" know more about the harm in fast foods.
re: Chemicalkinetics
SO not the point. The issue is the link between pushing the unhealthy foods/recipes for profit on one hand and pushing the medication to control the resulting disease on the other. Its the hypocrisy and the clear market positioning with her scheduled news tour,
I don't think anyone is suggesting she can't be a pastry chef as a diabetic. Adn personally, I'd rather see her driving an ice cream truck than making peanut butter velveeta cheese fudge.
The issue is pushing unhealthy foods/lifestyle with one hand, while pushing the medications to control the resulting disease process with the other.
Its shady. And to ignore the contradictory link between the two is IMHO being willfully blind....
re: freia
The velveeta peanut butter fudge...huh?
That is what has always bothered me about her food. She just piles on excess fat like it is a circus act.
Peanut butter fudge with velveeta, a hunk of cold macaroni and cheese wrapped in bacon and then fried, a hamburger between a Krispy Creme Donut, fried butter...
It seemed to me that she was trying her best to make things that were already loaded with fat even fattier because she couldn't come up with new recipes. Then calls it southern cooking.
I am a southerner and this is insulting to me.
re: Robinez
SO not making it up:
THIS particular part of the recipe cracks me up, and I quote:
"Because of the amount of butter in this recipe, pat top of candy with a paper towel to remove excess oil. "
In any event, I find it kind of disingenuous of her to claim that her cooking is back home, every day food for every day folks who can't afford 50 dollar filet mignons.
Surely there has to be a middle ground? Families on a budget aren't doomed to fast food, or Paula Deen mac and cheese recipes. And to claim this is representative of the South MUST be deeply offensive to a great number of Southerners who, well, resent her culinary POV as being representative of their history and culture...
This whole issue makes me want to go take a shower...
re: Robinez
LOLOLOL dont forget to blot and serve!!!!
re: Robinez
Thank you so much for saying that !
re: Robinez
How is velveeta fudge worse than any other fudge?
re: Robinez
I'm with you all the way, Robinez! I, too, am a Southerner and have never considered Paula Deen to be an expert on Southern cuisine. She's an expert on using a lot of convenience food (canned soups, Cool Whip, processed cheese spreads, etc.) to make quick dishes. I cook Southern , live Southern, extol the virtues of "Southerness" and have never once considered cooking Krispy Kreme hambugers, Krispy Kreme bread pudding, deep fried mac and cheese or fried butter.
An unhealthy lifestyle will put you at risk for Type II diabetes whether your Paula Deen, the Queen of England, The Pope or a chicken plucker.
re: gritsandgreens
"She's an expert on using a lot of convenience food "
If you watch her early shows you can see that she didn't use them. I expect that the lure of huge reimbursements for using convenience food swayed her down the dark path. I don't really know if I'd do it any differently if I was her, I'd like to think I'd refuse the kickbacks, but since it hasn't happened, I can't say for sure.
re: EWSflash
Can you identify the brands of the various convenience foods that she uses? FN is very careful about product labels (no free advertizing) on shows that are produced in house. Paula's shows though are produced by Gordon Elliott and his Follow Productions.
http://followproductions.com/ has a list of 'meet our friends', equipment brands that they feature on the shows - but no convenience foods.
re: paulj
Guess who's mac-n-cheese recipe calls for:
1 quart heavy cream
4 tablespoons fresh rosemary, chopped
Salt and cracked black pepper to taste
1/2 pound bacon,
1 pound elbow macaroni
2 cups (8 ounces) cheese
According to Follow Productions this chef has partnered with them, an ad agency, Wisconsin Cheese, and Viking stoves to produce a 12 part web series.
re: paulj
Her Strawberry Pretzel Salad recipe names Cool Whip and also uses cream cheese. She is paid to endorse Philadelphia brand cream cheese.
And here is another recipe, for Blackberry Cream Pie, which is nothing more than Cool Whip, blackberries and blackberry jam:
Her lasagna recipe (for one pan) calls for:
Sugar - which in my opinion is gratuitous and unneccesary
1 1/2 lbs ground beef
Cottage Cheese
Parmesan Cheese
Gruyere Cheese
Swiss Cheese
Cheddar Cheese
Mozzarella Cheese
And wait for it....
Yes, Cream Cheese, which of course she shills.
re: TrishUntrapped
Holy crap. Why not just inject it into your veins and get it over it?
re: LindaWhit
More like put it on your ass and hips and cut out the middle man... so to speak.
re: TrishUntrapped
The FN version of that pretzel salad
calls for whipped topping. I'm not surprised that her own web site is more brand specific. It also has her own store.
In this video of the pie, http://www.foodnetwork.com/videos/10-... she uses 'fresh sweetened whipped cream, yall'
The lasagna is a 2004 recipe. The cream cheese is being used like butter. It's 1 1/2t of sugar, which tweaks the seasoning of the tomato sauce. It wouldn't be needed with nice rice sweet tomatoes, right? How many cups of grated cheese would you put in a 9x13 lasagna?
re: TrishUntrapped
Here's the Kraft version of that pretzel salad
Notice the proper way of making a product enforcement:
....PHILADELPHIA Cream Cheese
.... COOL WHIP Whipped Topping
... JELL-O Strawberry Flavor Gelatin
She could have gotten a triple payment from the recipe if she'd done it right. In fact, Kraft might reneged on any payment, since she treats 'Cool Whip' as though it were a generic product.
talks about Paula 'teaming up' with Kraft in 2010.
re: TrishUntrapped
Once again, as the OP, I have no issue with PD's bizarre recipes. I do take issue that she hid her diagnoses until she found a way to cash in.
Let's just say you are diagnosed with breast cancer tomorrow. Will it take you 3 years to give an opinion? So many public people have come forward with whether they had a double or a single or a lumpectomy. They have shared their stories FOR FREE.
Mizz Deen decided to stay secret for THREE YEARS.
The problem is not that she cooks freakishly fattening non copyrighted recipes, but that she hid her diagnoses.
Of course most on this forum wish her well, as we have all had health issues. But the bottom line was that she took 3 years to study not the disease, but how to cash in on it. And sadly she read the crib notes while signing a lucrative contract.
re: Bellachefa
My support of PD has weened quite a bit since seeing her hem and haw her way through the interviews and appearances she did. Her line (or more likely, her PR team's line) was that she had to process the information and learn and be able to give back. Seriously? I imagine when you're diagnoses you don't dither around for 3 years trying to figure out what to do.
You learn and you do and you do it fast.
re: monavano
With three years she clearly should have gathered enough information about her personal story and treatments available to say more then she did. She actually said not a single word that would show that she had studied the disease and was informed in any way. Moderation and take a pill is not a service to others struggling with her disease. It is that utter disregard and disrespect that I find offensive. She may have simply said, "Hey y'all, I have decided to not educate myself, and instead will continue moderation and take a pill. I think y'awl should take this pill too." With all of the information available, that's the best she could come up with after a 3 year struggle????????????
re: Bellachefa
I thought PD's appearances when she "broke" the news were weak. She looked very nervous for someone with all those years of doing television. Her responses were vague and without detail.
re: TrishUntrapped
Apart from what that would do to your arteries, it just sounds *gross* and not remotely similar to lasagna.
re: TrishUntrapped
She has managed to perform a circus act with food all this time. The elephant swims? Lets see if he can walk on a wedge of deep fried macaroni and cheese.. The dog barks the ABC's? Let's see if he can do it with a stick of butter in his mouth...
I have never been fond of her or her take on southern cooking.. My opinion has always been that she doesn't even care about true southern cooking because she was too busy trying to change it. As if FAT alone is representative of the way folks in the south cook. It is insulting to anyone that knows better.
She also wasn't destitute and needed rent money when she sent her kids out to shill for her either, back in the day. It looks good on paper, but this wasn't the rags to riches story some folks seem to want to hold on to.
re: Robinez
"I have never been fond of her or her take on southern cooking.. My opinion has always been that she doesn't even care about true southern cooking because she was too busy trying to change it. As if FAT alone is representative of the way folks in the south cook. It is insulting to anyone that knows better."
This. This is exactly how I've felt about PD for years. And don't get me started on her exaggerated "Southern woman" stereotype, which I also find insulting to most Southern women.
re: paulj
Frankly, I only noticed that she started using convenience foods at some point. She didn't originally, and I doubt that whatever road she ended up taking was because that's what she knew about cooking, it's more likely to me that she started getting kickbacks, or whatever you care to call it. She built a big business knowing how to cook, it disappointed me that she went the route she did because she became a parody of herself. On the other hand, she made a shitload of money doing it. Slippery slope, being a food network star. Have you seen any of them that didn't gain a ton of weight from being on the Food Network? Sunny, Tyler Florence, most of them are the opposite of being a shadow of their former selves. I think it must be an occupational hazard.
re: EWSflash
I used to watch her a good bit when she first started. I found her to be genuine and sincere. My opinion of her has changed....just like the color of her eyes.
I remember, early on, a good many of her dishes using cream soups. What I don't recall is her using Cool Whip. If she wanted whipped cream , she made it fresh.
I wish Paula well and think her personal story is inspiring. It seems she has let her celebrity status get the best of her. I sincerely hope she doesn't crash and burn. That would be sad.
re: gritsandgreens
I agree.
re: Chemicalkinetics
Actually, the drug company has an associated website for diet and lifestyle, and she is shilling for it...
re: Chemicalkinetics
No, she doesn't NEED to but it would be ethical to show a change in lifestyle is also important, since she's putting herself out there.
re: chowser
It seems to me that she is doomed either ways, am I not correct? If she shows a change of lifestyle and change in her cooking style now, then she will be criticized that she did not change for 3 years ago when she knew about her diabetes, right? If she continue this same her lifestyle and cooking show, and only promotes the drug, then you are saying it is unethical. Personally, I don't see it as unethicial. It may not be smart, but it is not unethical, which is not the same thing.
Like I ask you earlier, what do you think of the reverse example? A person who advocate a lifestyle and diet change without taking any medication. It is certainly not a full treatment. Would this person advocating a lifestyle change be unethical sine she does not take the medication. Now, it is reverse.
What is unethical is if she takes the drug and know the drug did not work for her and she still promote it, then it is unethicial, or if she has never taken the drug, and promotes it, then it is unethicial. I can tell you many celebrities promote things they do not even like -- thinks all the breakfast cereal. Paula Deens is hardly the only one who sell unhealthy diet or foods.
re: Chemicalkinetics
PD can do what she wants. She is a businessperson and she can cook whatever she wants and sell whatever she wants. That is freedom.
And the rest of us don't have to like it and can speak out. That is also freedom.
She is trading on her image. And that image is based on some hypocrisy. She projects that she cares about her audience. But she conceals her disease while shoveling more unhealthy food.
And then, having promoted that unhealthy lifestyle, reveals her disease and endorses the medication to profit from that. More inconsistency and hypocrisy.
She is doomed either way now, because she made the choice to conceal the disease for 3 years and continue to promote these unhealthy foods.
CKinetics -- I see some of what you're saying. Yes, we can have unhealthy foods in the public marketplace. Yes, unhealthy people can promote unhealthy food. But here we have a couple things that take this over the top.
re: karykat
"She projects that she cares about her audience. But she conceals her disease while shoveling more unhealthy food."
Ok, point taken. I don't watch enough of her show to know this. If so, then I agree with you.
re: Chemicalkinetics
A person with diabetes can control their diabetes without drugs, especially in the early stages, often for decades and remain healthy. A person with diabetes cannot be healthy by eating whatever he/she wants and just take drugs. So, they're not reverse examples.
If she pushes the drugs alone, with her former lifestle and thinks her followers will listen, then it's unethical. It would be no different than if Anthony Bourdain encouraged alcoholics to drink and said it was fine because he does.
re: chowser
I am looking at a very fundament level. That is, if she is promoting a drug which help her, then there is no hypocrisy . Hypocrisy only happens if you advocates something which you don't believe in. She changing her lifestyle or not is irrelevant for promoting a drug. She may, or she may not. Actresses who promote skincare lotion just have to show the lotion works (and most of them actually don't). These actresses all have horrible sleeping patter and some have alcohol and drug problem... all of which makes the skin worse. Take religion. It is only hypocrispy if you peach a god which you don't believe in. There are many people who peach heaven and gods, and we don't know if it is true. There is no data to prove it. Is it unethical that they peach something which may be untrue?
"It would be no different than if Anthony Bourdain encouraged alcoholics to drink and said it was fine because he does." Like I said, it really depends what he is promoting. If all he is promoting is a drug which lessen the harmfulness of alcohol say a drug for hepatitis A or hepatitis B, then I see nothing unethnical about it. It is not very smart, but it is not unethnical. Christopher Hitchens drank til the day he died from cancer. There is nothing immoral about that. He told his audience that he was still drinking his Scotch. If Anthony Bourdain is trying to say that the drug alone is the complete treatment, then no, that would be wrong. It really depends what the person is selling. What the message is. The question is: Is Paula really saying what you claim she did? That is, did she really say "Take this drug and you can eat whatever you want including my butter deep fried food and still be free of diabetic problems"
re: Chemicalkinetics
"Christopher Hitchens drank til the day he died from cancer. There is nothing immortal about that. He told his audience that he was still drinking his Scotch"
Hitch wasn't a hypocrite. He wasn't flogging any form of treatment. He was reportedly still smoking, too. It's not remotely implausible that a fair number of Deen's fans are in diabetes territory, it often being a disease of excess. Who better to pitch a med than someone credible with that audience/market? That she's complicit doesn't help...
re: Kagemusha
"nothing immortal about that" -- Freudian slip?
re: Kagemusha
"He wasn't flogging any form of treatment. "
Neither was Paula Deen. That was my point. Paula Deen did not said eating her fatty diet is a treatment for diabetes. Just like Hitchens did not say drinking Scotch cures cancer. Was it smart that he kept drinking, probably not, but he did not claim it was helpful. I don't know what Paula Deen did during her treatment, but it matters not. She did not claim her fatty recipes help bring the diabetes under control. I assume she claims the drug helped her.
Another example. An ice cream truck man got diabestes. He continues to drive and sells his ice cream. He then later tell his friends that he is on a diabetes treatment and is taking some drugs which help control the conditions. Does he somehow lose his right and authority to testify a drug because he sells ice cream? Are you suggesting that this ice cream man has no moral right to talk about his experience with this drug until he stop driving an ice cream truck? Does Paula Deen lose her ability to talk about a drug effectiveness because she is selling recipes of high calories.
re: Chemicalkinetics
She IS flogging a treatment, and uses an ongoing treatment herself. When you say you don't know what PD did during her treatment, it implies that this was an isolated medical event, was treated and its over with. It isn't. She has to undergo daily testing and treatment to control her Diabetes type 2. While advocating the lifestyle that got her into trouble in the first place on tv.
And yes as a paid spokesperson for a drug marketed to people who get into this predicament as a result of following her particular dietary habits, she does lose the credibility to be paid to market this drug. This is different from mentioning it casually to friends and/or family. Her hands aren't clean. She's taking money from both ends of the spectrum, on one hand to foster conditions to create a disease, then delivers these people to the other hand which peddles the medication. She's promulgating the problem for her own gains because the more people with type 2 diabetes that she fosters through her food style/programs/recipes etc. and then delivers to the drug company, the more money she makes from both ends of the spectrum. Your examples don't take into account the factor of financial compensation for playing both ends towards the middle. The ice cream truck driver isn't paid a premium by a drug company for his ability to get his customers to purchase from that drug company. This isn't about a moral right to tell friends about your ongoing medical condition. This is about a person taking money from both ends of a self serving spectrum to the detriment of the "fans" for whom she professes to care.
I just think you're trolling at this point, but that's JMHO...
re: freia
"When you say you don't know what PD did during her treatment, it implies that this was an isolated medical event, was treated and its over with. It isn't. She has to undergo daily testing and treatment to control her Diabetes type 2."
No, I meant there is a trial peroid for a drug to show its efficacy. Presumbly Paula took this diabetic drug for a certain amount of time. Within this time, she may or may not changed her own eating habit. My point is that it does not matter if she changes her eating habit. Her right to talk about the drug is all the same.
"she does lose the credibility to be paid to market this drug."
No, she lose credibility as a lifestyle expert, but she does not lose credibility as a person who tried the drug and talk about the drug. It is probably not good for the drug company to use her as a spokeperson, but that is the company decision. Just like the fact that Lance Armstrong was a spokeperson for a cancer drug which helped him. He certainly wasn't living a perfect life and was engaging counterproductive lifestyle.
"Her hands aren't clean. "
You don't think a person driving an ice cream truck or working behind McDonald cashier are also with "hands aren't clean".
"I just think you're trolling at this point"
Then don't feed the troll.
re: Chemicalkinetics
"Paula Deen did not said eating her fatty diet is a treatment for diabetes. Just like Hitchens did not say drinking Scotch cures cancer."
WTF? Deen's just a shill who belongs in Infomercial-land, which is where I suspect she's headed. Think you're a bit confused about the ethical/credibility issues in play.
re: Kagemusha
Do you honestly think everyone who watched Paula Deen ran off to the kitchen after each ep to replicate what they'd just seen her make? I've watched probably 50 eps, and I've never made anything from her. You'd think we have absolutely no choice about what we eat, that we utterly and completely live to be influenced by our media choices.
It's just a TV show, already. Not mind control. Your hatred for the woman has grown tiresome.
re: Jay F
Do I think everyone does? No. Do I think some fanbots do? Yes.
I'm curious to know what you gained from watching her show? Not an attack on you, JF, just wondering what someone who watched about 50 eps got from the show if you don't have any interest in making the food. Is there some method you gained knowledge of?
re: Leepa
No, I wouldn't say I learned anything specific. It's purely entertainment for me. I never tire of watching (some) people making food. I don't mind her personality, or that part of it that she shows on her early TV shows (I haven't had cable in about three years, and I understand she has shows I've never seen). She's always seemed like a very pleasant person to me.
re: chowser
Exactly. Victoza is a drug way down on the treatment algorithm, given its newness to the market and its black box warning. The company is using Paula to market it to the most unhealthy and unwilling to eat better demographic by leap frogging over safer interventions. It's no accident she's said she's not changing her diet.
re: LindaWhit
It's just unconscionable, and that's my objection. She's entitled to keep her medical condition a secret while cooking whatever she wants. But when she makes it public in order to profit by leading her flock to the proverbial slaughter, it's pure evil on her part and the drug company's.
re: mcf
More on Victoza: http://motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2...
re: Chemicalkinetics
This looks like she's trying to be a spokesman for a diabetic lifestyle.
re: chezwhitey
EWWWWW That is so wrong. She didn't want to give up her lifestyle, so she stopped drinking sweet tea? and she takes walks with her husband? and she chases after her grandchildren - smart kids running away from granny dearest.
I think watching that video made her case all the worst. She says something like, 'for years sumov y'all have asked me how to make my recipes lighter for diabetics"
And she blue them off for three years until she could have a marketing plan that included her brood and laugh at her fans all the way to the bank? I was never a fan. In the early years she made me laugh. Then she became a cartoon, making her accent over the top from her real voice. There is something dark and sinister about this woman.
re: Bellachefa
I was never a fan.
That's the understatement of the year.....
re: Bellachefa
Completely agree. It was so forced and stilted, and disingenuous. I shouldn't be surprised, though. Nothing surprises me anymore when it comes to marketing.
re: Chemicalkinetics
I don't think the foodies here want any celebrity to talk about food, even if it is healthy. Consider, for example, the reaction to the GP cover on Bon Appetit last summer.
re: chowser
What I'm wondering is how this will change the format of her shows, as well as being on other Food Network programs. As a rule, she eats enormous bites of whatever she is making - or her guests are making - and near as I can tell she must not spit it out. This goes for sweet stuff, fatty stuff and salty stuff.
Heck, I keep thinking I need to change my moniker from "breadchick" as I rarely bake those lovely rustic loaves, buttery yeast loaves, etc. these days. It just messes with my weight and mood.
Maybe I should call myself "broiledsalmonchick."
re: breadchick
As long as you love it, I think it's appropriate to remain breadchick. And, much better abbreviation as bchick than bschick!
re: breadchick
So what if she eats big bites on her shows? How often is that? How many shows has she shot in the past year?
There were 2 PD shows this evening, both old repeats (2006, 2008).
re: paulj
Wow, chill, paulj. My point is that with all the over the top recipes that I see on her show, I'm wondering if eating even small samples of the food messes with her sugar levels. My uncle has "the diabetes" and had to give up all kinds of stuff because it does that to him - bread, etc. Just wondering. I didn't kick her in the arse.
re: paulj
'While making changes in her personal life, she doesn't think her TV shows — there are three — will look much different. She spends about 30 days a year taping, "so I'm not cooking and eating that way every day."'
is the NN ad-site featuring her smiling face and 'story'
The timing of this announcement shows what I hope many have known all along, which is that Paula Deen's priorities are the almighty dollar and her own personal interests. Her Smithfield (i.e. megafarm) ham endorsement was a disgrace but the public gives her a pass because of this southern maternal grandmother persona she's milked to the bank. It's funny how the timing of her diabetes announcement comes just as she signs a contract to endorse novo nordisk. If she didn't sign that endorsement contract she would never have had the interview confirming her diabetes and would have kept it under wraps. Tony has been spot on the whole time about her.
re: Bunson
I'm anticipating a chain of Deen buffets with in-house pharmacies and bariatric clinics for the more Shamu-like patrons. Never say no to a buck, right?
re: Bunson
Re: her Smithfield endorsement, I can remember once she was interviewing on NPR, possibly on Talk of the Nation, but i could be mistaken. Anyway, a well spoken woman called who worked in one of the smithfield plants, which were i believe on strike, basically to inform Paula of the working conditions, and asking her to meet with the Union to hear what they had to say. Basically she got her off the phone as quick as she could and said something to the effect of work is hard and dangerous, get over it.
Why am i piling on? Hell, i don't know. That interview just rubbed me the wrong way, the way this whole deal does, i guess.
re: Bunson
More than spot on. Fellow professionals talk off-camera, they know the 911 on each other for sport/competition as much as general concern and curiosity. Tony is out there making money in his own way and who knows what the future holds.
Bottom line, we build these tv folks up only to tear them down. We all do it to some degree and we love watching the wreckage.
So if you want your tv food celebs to come clean we should be willing to admit we love the drama.
re: honeybea
He's got a jab for everyone but most are self-confident enough or mature enough to laugh it off or ignore the shots. Deen reacted like a drama queen and now we know how on the money he was and how flat out full of ...er...butter... she was.
re: rochfood
Wow, maybe they have a point. What's yours?
re: rochfood
Self-righteous as in people who are upset that someone has a lifestyle that causes a serious disease and continues to push it, despite suffering from it? Maybe self-righteous but if someone continued to glorify chain smoking, three years after being diagnosed with lung cancer, it would probably be a problem, too, with a lot of people.
re: chowser
To continue your analogy, not just to glorify chain smoking, but to sell cigarettes and to sell a treatment for lung cancer.
Rochfood, I imagine I'm not alone in not wanting to judge her personal choices, but having a huge problem with her trying to profit from making people sick and then getting them (somewhat) better again. And yes, people need to make their own food choices, but she doesn't need to make money from patching over a problem (via the drug) she helped create (via food).
"[Novo Nordisk company spokeswoman] Morley said the company didn't know Deen had diabetes when it approached her about promoting the new health initiative.
'We really just wanted to ask her, "Hey, Paula, do you think we could challenge you to change up some of your recipes and make them diabetes-friendly," ' Morley said. 'And her reply was, "How did you guys know I had diabetes?" ' "
re: racer x
The job of publicists and spokespeople is to spinnnnn
re: Bellachefa
And isn't it interesting how they made a spontaneous link between her dietary habits, cooking style, body type, and type 2 diabetes? And figured out that those following her show and kitchen methods would most likely be in need of their product?
re: Bellachefa
Just *look* at all of those plates spinning in the air at once!
re: LindaWhit
Paula Deen has deceived repeat DECEIVED the puhlic!
She was found selling her cookbook on HSN or QVC, and presently the Queen of LIes is selling on the HSN or QVC her high fat food and recipe books,
As a wife of a dear husband who has Type 2 diabetees and cooking healthy........I RESENT what she did! She should have come clean when she found out of her health condition.................she will PROFIT by being a spokeswoman for costly drugs. IF she has come clean ..............food choices might have given other folks a carrot vs drugs
Healthy Foody for Life!
re: laura10952
She has never been deceptive as to the non-healthiness of her food. What she is deceptive about is that the recipes she prints are not her own. You can find most of them in Junior League or Telephone Pioneer cookbooks across the south. She owes them an apology for getting rich off of their recipes. HOWEVER, she doesnt owe diabetics a thing! We are all responsible for our own choices. In this day and age, no one can say that they have no idea how to eat healthy and that they cooked the recipes hawked by this short fat dumpy lady and thought they were cooking health food!
re: Lesjes89
She doesn't owe them a thing until she starts telling diabetics that one piece of cake is fine if they don't eat the whole cake, and, "here, just take this drug that I'll make a little money off of" now that you're sick.
I think BOTH a) people are individually responsible for their own eating, and 2) her behavior recently is highly problematic.
re: MiriamWoodstock
Yes, exactly.
re: MiriamWoodstock
I think you're making a presumption here, aren't you?
Has she actually swaid that on any of her shows?
re: EWSflash
No, she said it on The Chew.
re: laura10952
I think that is a misstatement. No one has taken her a someone who promotes a healthy diet. If they did then they aren't too smart. Okay scratch the first part of my statement.
re: scubadoo97
And folks who are the least well read or sophisticated are the most vulnerable to such flacks.
I watch her show all the time because it happens to be on my kitchen t.v. when I am cooking dinner and I just leave it on FN. I don't eat her type of food but I have never been a "hater", never gave her much thought. What really bugs me in all of this is...her defensiveness to the point of being an idiot.
WHEN did she EVER stress "moderation"? What show was that? I musta missed it. I have heard her suggest whoopie pies as a great snack for kids, sugar laden breakfast parfaits *before* your chocolate waffles with caramel syrup, oh...lets not forget to add the sprig of mint because "y'all need your vegetables" on top of that deep fried twinkie with whipped cream and chocolate shavings.....Ha ha haaaaaaaaaa!!!!!! She does the "mint sprig schick" every other show and constantly jokes about the sugar, fat and calories in her food. I have never even heard her joke about moderation- just the opposite- always suggesting her foods are family friendly. Not just for special events.
I also have never watched an episode where she suggested that she "really doesn't eat like this all the time". WTH? When? Husband Michael loves this and that...bobby loves this...Jamie loves this...yada, yada. What about "Love and BEST dishes...from my kitchen to y'alls"???? I don't recall ever hearing her make the comment on her show to remember that she is your cook- not your doctor......and don't eat like this often. Has anyone else heard her say this?
Defensive back peddling is one thing...outright lying is another. She has never stressed moderation or that her dishes are only to be eaten "on occasion". I think it is really idiotic for an obese diabetic woman to make a statements about "moderation" when she clearly doesn't understand that concept- and now tell the public in a general statement that "it's okay for a diabetic to eat a piece of cake, just not the whole cake". No, it's not! Not if you are still obese with blood sugars so out of control you need MEDS! CRIPES. What a terrible message, Dr Paula. Any medical professional will tell you to stabilize your sugars and lose weight FIRST before considering how much layer cake you can have "in moderation"...whatever the hell that means to each individual. Just not smart statements coming out of her mouth right now. Especially if diagnosed for years and still obese and needing meds....maybe she is doing it wrong and people shouldn't listen to that advice, hmmmm. She is making a crappy self appointed role model for successfully living with diabetes IMO. She missed an opportunity to actually help people and that is a shame and it bothers me.
re: sedimental
I really enjoyed your post sedimental.
re: Bellachefa
Thanks I was rambling/venting a bit. Didn't realize it bugged me so much until I read some of her comments.
If she would have just come out and simply talked about how HARD it is to make changes in your cooking style, that she has not been very successful at it yet-but is still trying, etc. She would not have such a huge credibility problem and I think people would have understood a bit better. This defensive reinventing history stuff is crazy.
Wait, this was a secret? Let me ask you, does she look like she has diabetes or not? If you have to hesitate to answer that..
All this cooking personalities have private secrets. In her autobiography Paula Deen says one of the other female chefs throws up after every meal. Don't know who that is (all the skinny ones are now suspect). Her health is a private matter, never made anything is cooked except the corn blueberry muffins from her autobiography book, (they were awful) Can't stand all the "endorsing" all of them do.
I remember watching A Next Foodnetwork Star episode and one of the main concerns from
Suzy whateverhername judge was if a particular contestant would be able to "sell all the related pots,pans etc). So all of them are there to sell , the cooking is incidental.
By the way who do you think PD was pointing the finger at in that vomiting comment?
There are a lot of cats clawing their way to the top at the cooking channel.
re: meinNYC
Her health is not a private matter. If it was, she wouldn't be on all the news shows, shilling her drug, shilling her son's cooking shows. If it was truly private, then she wouldn't be doing that. No one forced her into this lifestyle of selling her image.
re: wyogal
Her health was a private matter. It is not a private matter now because she decided to talk about it. Nevertheless, it is her choicing. In other words, she has the power to make it a private or not, just like anyone here. You can talk about your height and weight, or may be not. It is up to you.
My answer is the title of the post: "Why did she keep it a secret for three years..." Because she can.
re: Chemicalkinetics
She's no different than the drunks and druggies on Celebrity Rehab--both get paid to "share."
re: Kagemusha
Seriously? Wow.
re: Chemicalkinetics
And why are we talking about the hypocrisy and opportunism of it?
Because we can.
(CK -- I think we're being consistent.)
re: karykat
Ha ha ha. Of course, you can. I am not denying your right of expression, at least I hope I didn't come across that way.
No doubt that some of Deen's recipes are not very healthy, but then I also think it really depends how you view her shows. Do you consider it as a lifestyle cooking show or do you consider it as a special niche cooking show like a barbecue show. Surely, we don't think a barbecue show is try to get people eat barbecue all day long.
Now, if you consider her show as more of lifestyle show and that she is selling a not-so-healthy lifestyle. It becomes what you consider her state of mind. She may be as evil as you described her. Or you can think of it the other way. She has done unhealthy cooking in the past, which increased her risk of diabetes. She then tried this drug which significantly improved her health (back under control), and she wants to spread the words. I don't see a problem getting paid. Everyone get paid as a spokeperson one way or the others.
Rachel Ray, according to her own account, became the spokeperson for Furi Cutlery because she has a great experience with the Furi sharpener and Furi knives. Personally, I think Furi knives are crap, but I also have little doubt that Rachel Ray actually likes the Furi knives and truely believes they are good knives. In her state of mind, she is trying to spread the words about the great Furi knives. In my opinion, she is doing more damage by selling people crappy knives and teaching people bad knife techniques and by selling bad knives, then promote more Furi sharpeners.... the entire self feeding circle.
However, I won't say Rachel Ray is immortal or hypocritic. I think she is not very well imformed and sometime silly. To be hypocritical, you have to intentionally deceive. I don't think Rachel Ray knows Furi knives are bad horrible knives and therefore she cannot be intentionally deceive.
Like I said before, if Deens tried this drug and it did not work for her, and she is promoting it, then she is full of hypocrisy. However, if it works for Deen, and she is promoting it. I don't see a problem in hypocrispy here.
re: Chemicalkinetics
Now that she's promoting the drug, and promoting a new "lifestyle" on her website as a diabetic, do you think she should be obligated to show the nutritional info of her recipes on her show, especially saturated fat and calorie content? I think we all can intrinsically tell that her recipes are unhealthy, but we don't get a real sense for how bad they are unless we actually see the numbers. Fair or unfair?
re: chezwhitey
"we don't get a real sense for how bad they are unless we actually see the numbers."
Good point. That kind of disclosure of nutritional information shocked Canadian diners a few years ago when some chain restos voluntarily listed fat, sugar and calorie data for their dishes.
re: chezwhitey
I will give you this. If she is selling diabestic recipes, then yes, she should list the some numbers, especially the glyemic index, and glyemic load.
What I am also wondering is: can the same person do both? Can a person create a recipe list which is friendly to diabetic people, and another list for others? Kinda like Coke selling normal coke and diet Coke.
re: Chemicalkinetics
Not "if" and there is some nutritional info at the bottom, but not sure about the glycemic index info.
Pretty slick stuff for a recent development, eh?
re: Chemicalkinetics
For diabetics, GI and GL are not the point. It's the total carbs that drive up glucose.
GI and GL are sort of useful for folks who don't have metabolic syndrome or diabetes, but not reliably so, there are huge individual variations in responses to foods that are supposed to be low GI.
re: wyogal
It's certainly not a private matter when you're a paid spokesman for diabetes medicine at the same time as strongly advocating dangerous behavior and giving health advice on her show.
re: royaljester
Does she actually say on her show '*you should* cook and eat this food'? Or does she say, 'this is how you prepare this dish, and it's delicious'?
re: racer x
She actually says if you have diabetes *you should* eat a slice of cake instead of a whole cake. She actually said that. I don't think she should be giving that kind of medical advice to people with diabetes. There are too many examples of this.
Obviously, you can say she's trying to compromise people eating whole cakes but that's not the issue. The issue is her saying it's okay to eat even a slice of fudge cake. No, it's not okay.
re: royaljester
But that's exactly what folks who take meds like Victoza want; to eat the same crap that made them ill and take a pill for it. That's why Paula is saying she's not changing her diet, to sell to that lemming demographic. :-/
re: royaljester
Wouldn't the drug industry want her to promote an unhealthy lifestyle so they can shill their expensive new drugs while they stop making less profitable antibiotics that may be needed to save your life in the ER.
Anyone think the drug industry gives a crap about you is crazy. It's all sales and profit. Yes they care about you and how they can introduce their drugs into your life.
re: scubadoo97
amen scoobyduby
re: Bellachefa
what industry "gives a crap about you"? I guess I'm cynical and accept that every for-profit industry is out for their management and shareholders' gain, so stuff like what the drug companies do doesn't really bother me or faze me.
re: FattyDumplin
Not every industry has a stranglehold on our government's and other public health policy, expenditures and therefore, our own clinical outcomes.
re: mcf
It's crazy though, right? I mean, what was I reading about ketchup being classified as a vegetable. Or the billions that are spent by big tobacco. My main point was once you take a cynical bent to life, then you tend to not accept everything at face value and instead form opinions on your own. But I hear you.
re: FattyDumplin
What were you reading about ketchup?
I like to form my own opinions, but I also like to base them on facts, not rumors and speculations about other people's motives. Not even the motives of celebrities.
re: scubadoo97
You're right, except I'm not convinced that they care about you any more than their bottom line says they need to.
re: scubadoo97
You are giving Paula Deen way too much power and credit. The diabetic prediction models have been made for the next 30 years, and Paula Deen was not included as part of that factor. Diabetic rate is related to country's wealth when we are talking one country. China and India are both expected to have a huge growth in diabetes, and it has nothing to do with Paula Deen. People start getting wealthy, eat excessively, less exercise, other bad lifestyles...etc.
It may feel good to dump that responsibility and hatred onto Paula Deen and the drug companies or some agriculture industries or meat farms, but we are doing this to ourselves. The rate of diabetes will not change with or without a person like Paula Deen. The idea that Paula Deen is responsible for our diabetic rate is what I really don't understand.
Think about this: If Paula Deen gets off TV tomorrow, what is the percentage change of diabetes? What real effect would that be? A drop of 1%? A drop of 0.1%? I would argue; NOTHING. In the big picture, she did not has any real effect.
re: Chemicalkinetics
Back to the knives, Chem--seriously. You're OT.
re: Kagemusha
I didn't write anything about knives.
re: Chemicalkinetics
Exactly. Better off sticking to knives I think...
re: Lesjes89
Ummmm, but that's what she wants, our business.
re: Lesjes89
Ummmm, she made it our business? As part of a marketing plan???
I think the problem many people have is not in that MINUTE (as you put it) she was diagnosed, but in the THREE YEARS since she was diagnosed she did nothing, at least publicly, to further the education of her followers about her situation. She continued, at least publicly, on the fatty, sugary path she'd been on for years. Only until she'd snagged the medication shilling deal did she come forward. Telling.
Paula, her cooking & hypocrisy are disgusting, and so is the drug company that hired her as their pimp
http://www.everydayhealth.com/type-2-... And every magazine under the sun is going to address this announcement with their own spin until the next buzz worthy story headlines. The comment section says it all.
I like Paula Deen. I enjoy watching her shows, I have a book of hers and have tried a few of her recipes. Now, I don't eat like that everyday and I don't believe she encourages people to cook the way she does everyday -- that is where good judgment comes in. I usually save that type of cooking for holidays and very special occasions. Sure, if I could eat like that all of the time without the weight gain and health complications I most definitely would. What bothers me about this whole thing is that she is a PAID endorser for a drug company. Type 2 diabetes can pretty much be reversed in most people with weight loss and exercise. She doesn't have to change the premise of her show at all. All she has to do is eat less and exercise. She didn't have to become a paid endorser for a drug company. She has enough money and that just seems odd to me. You can't blame a cooking show or a fast food chain for being overweight. You have to learn moderation and use good judgment. I'm just bothered by the fact that she would encourage drug use as opposed to weight loss and exercise. I don't think she should have gone there.
I found the following illuminating, Paula's own comments on her New Year's resolutions from a year ago,
I was also interested to see how many times the word "moderation" came up in her autobiography, since she now says that she has always recommended moderation. According to Amazon's search function, the number would be zero.
Another search term I used was "vomit" since someone earlier had posted that Paula reported other female chefs throwing up their food. Turns out it was in the context of saying she had heard the rumors... Nice.
The New York Post (yes, I know it is a rag) reported that she was spotted polishing off a plate of tiramisu the night before her big tv admission.
I think this writer made some good points, especially comparing how Magic Johnson handled his diagnosis with AIDS.
re: Bellachefa
Correction noted.
re: Bellachefa
That's the problem with diabetics who are guided to such meds... they're told to use them instead of healthy habits to control their blood sugar. Trouble is, controlling a crap diet with medication instead of healthy eating leads to higher complications and mortality.
re: GH1618
Yes, but the diet the ADA recommends (due to drug and cereal and candy company funding?) is high carb! That creates the market for the drugs when diet alone is safer and more effective at risk reduction.
When the research proved that sugar was no more damaging to diabetics than starches are, their recommendation was for diabetics to include sugar in their diets, not to reduce starches!
I'm sure the sponsorships by General Mills, Cadbury Schweppes and others had nothing to do with that.
re: Bellachefa
Thanks for letting me know. :-)
Yeah, the advertising for a drug company is lame. But I don't really get this thread. Is it okay to eat/cook like crap until you get diabetes (or some other disease), and then all the sudden it becomes not okay?
I'm not really going to look up to someone who promotes that kind of diet, regardless of whether or not they have diabetes.
BTW -- High fat (and butter) diets do NOT cause diabetes. Butter is actually very good for you, and It's one of the few fats that's actually okay to deep fry. It's high sugar (& carbs) that cause diabetes. Un-fortunately, PD has plenty of all of the above.
Carey Jones over @ Serious Eats really hit all the points for me. Many of the comments by SE readers resonate with CH's weighing in but I'll be happier when PD's had some time to regroup and rework her approach going forward. I truly believe she was not full ready or prepared for the onslaught and I won't be at all surprised that this shake up will be steadier and clearer in the weeks ahead....both on camera and in print.
re: LindaWhit
and 3 years to line up her deals to make a profit off it.
re: LindaWhit
Hey LW, I appreciate that but clearly once the announcement was made public whether 3 years ago or yesterday the reaction to the announcement is just getting started.
re: HillJ
I hope so. The medication she's signed on to promote to folks who want to keep eating the way she says she does has a black box warning on the package, the highest risk level given to dangerous meds. The ones that should only be used if nothing else will work because the danger is so high.
re: wyogal
Nice hail Mary pass, but it's a day late and a pile of dollars short. Damage control, anyone?
re: wyogal
Sounds like she's not one of those celebrities that sues a gossip rag for millions and donates the whole thing to charity.
OMG. I hated Bourdain... but he was absolutely right. I wish Paula would come out and explicitly say she was so wrong.
Perhaps she still has time to correct the thousands (miillions?) of people she has set on a path towards an early death.
re: drongo
Now this is really over the top. Everybody (it sometimes seems) wants to blame someone else for their problems. Better to take responsibility for one's own eating habits, in my opinion.
re: GH1618
I agree. We should all take responsibility for our own health choices.
But is it an "either or"?
Everyone should be responsible.
AND PD should not promote unhealthy food and not acknowledge the health consequences. (Especially when profiting from that and the drug.)
re: drongo
It's TV, not mind control! If it could influence us mindless zombies and make us cook with 3 pounds of butter, we'd still live longer than if we took Bourdain's example of drinking to excess day in and day out.
If, if these TV hosts could influence us to a great extent, which is the assumption Bourdain is making, then he'd better take a look in the mirror at the person who created an untold number of alcoholics who are set on a path towards and early death.
In short, Bourdain shouldn't be throwing any stones here. The only stones in questions are the 2 big ones in his tighty whities.
re: monavano
I think you've completely missed the point; Bourdain isn't an alcoholic promoting some expensive and life threatening drug to help you keep drinking as if you're not alcoholic. That's the analogy to PD's activity.