I needn't belabor the news that Paula Deen, a celebrity chef on TV (that was news to me; nobody tells me anything...) "came out" with her Type 2 diabetes. Paula Deen's cooking has apparently long been a study in Southern-style indulgence, with an emphasis on the deep fryer and plenty of butter. From what I have gleaned, Ms. Deen has never met a nutrition fact she didn't like to ignore.
But I'm not inclined to wag a finger at Ms. Deen. Nor do I want to wade into the debate about her advocacy for a particular diabetes drug to treat a condition she need not have developed in the first place.
I want simply to talk about the opportunity to love food that loves us back, and the fundamental importance of making that the prevailing norm.
First, food matters. We have incontrovertible evidence, reaffirmed many times over the past several decades, that the major determinants of premature mortality and chronic morbidity in modern society are tobacco use, dietary pattern and physical activity. Or, as I like to put it -- feet, forks and fingers.
We have clear evidence that even moderate improvements of diet and activity can prevent Type 2 diabetes in nearly 60 percent of high-risk adults, and evidence that more fundamental improvements to lifestyle could prevent almost all of it -- and certainly more than 90 percent. We know that children now get Type 2 diabetes, while a generation ago it was called "adult onset" diabetes, because the condition in children was essentially unheard of.
We know that diet can be and often is the difference between good health, and ill health. This is not controversial.
The trouble is, we have propagated the view that we have to choose between food we love, and health we love. And since food provides immediate gratification, while good health is a long-term return on a long-term investment, the immediate gratification of food tends to prevail. We eat, drink and make merry -- and defer worrying about the cost. But the cost eventually comes due -- all too often in the form of a serious chronic disease that need not have occurred.
As chronic diseases develop at ever younger age, while we live to ever older -- the percentage of our lives encumbered by that "cost" is rising. And, consequently, so is the cost itself. We pay dearly.
In essence, then, we are mortgaging our health to pay for the pleasure of our palate. This may be hard to justify under any circumstances. But there would, at least, be a case to be made if the only way to enjoy food were to give up health. If the only food that tasted good were bad for us, we would have a tough decision to make. And some might say -- to hell with health! They might come to regret it, but we could all understand the choice.
But there is no such choice to be made. There are variations on the theme of optimal eating available to us all. Among them is the Mediterranean diet, which is itself a dietary theme and parent to a number of variations. Important about them all is this: Many of us would go to Mediterranean countries and gladly spend our good money on the excellent food! Not because the food is good for us -- but because it's just plain good!
But it is also good for us. It offers us the opportunity to love food that loves us back. To get pleasure in the pursuit of health, and health in the pursuit of pleasure. The Mediterranean diet offers this -- and so do many other cuisines around the globe. Whatever your palate, there is room for you where culinary pleasure and health converge.
Given this possibility, why practice the brand of denial that seems to prevail? Those of us who advocate for healthful eating need not be culinary cretins. My wife, raised in southern France, is a fabulous cook. Catherine and I, and our kids -- love good food. We just love food that loves us back.
And chefs need not fry butter to show they care about cuisine. In an age of epidemic obesity and diabetes, chefs can shoulder the responsibility of making food that is both good, and good for us.
An analogy springs to mind. Cars can have incredible horsepower. They can also have great fuel efficiency. There was a time when great horsepower at the expense of lousy fuel efficiency was fine. But we now know the costs of that profligacy -- monetary costs, and more importantly, environmental costs. We are now inclined to demand both fuel economy and performance, or strike a balance between the two. But the world no longer condones a "to hell with fuel efficiency" attitude, because the stakes are too high.
I suppose you might watch a car race for fun (I don't get that, actually, but different strokes...), but in doing so, you generally aren't planning on getting that kind of car, or driving that way. Car racing is not intended as an audience-participation experience. If cooking shows were a similar diversion, it might not matter much what the chefs are cooking. But if, as seems probable, the intent is "go ahead and try this at home!" -- then what's cookin' truly does matter.
The stakes are every bit as high in our kitchens, as in our garages. Our health, the health of those we love -- is on the line. So maybe it's time for us all to draw a line in the sand and not cross. Chefs who can't make food both good and good for us don't really have enough expertise to warrant our attention. They don't have the full culinary skill set modern living requires. We should tune them out.
Pretending that food doesn't matter to health is at best denial, at worst a serious delusion. We should not mortgage health to pay for culinary delight, any more than we should give up culinary pleasure to purchase health. We can love food that loves us back.
Bring on the chefs talented enough and responsible enough to help us bake that particular cake, and eat it, too!
-fin
For more by David Katz, M.D., click here.
For more on diet and nutrition, click here.
Dr. David L. Katz; www.davidkatzmd.com
www.turnthetidefoundation.org
Follow David Katz, M.D. on Twitter: www.twitter.com/DrDavidKatz
Cathy Erway: Our Food Is Not Just Entertainment, Paula Deen
Healthy Eating Plate and Healthy Eating Pyramid - What Should I ...
Nutrition and healthy eating - MayoClinic.com
Paula Deen Says She Has Type 2 Diabetes - NYTimes.com
Did Paula Deen's Own Cooking Give Her Diabetes? | Healthland ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iosoXlr3ZVI
The fats that Paula Deen was cooking and obviously consuming (MEAT, DAIRY, EGGS) can cause Type 2 Diabetes.
GOOD FATS are avocado, nuts, seeds, olives, soy, peanut butter, olive oil.
Paula Deen's diet and lifestyle were NOT loving her back. The tragic part is that she refuses to admit that.
But then, Deen is making her millions off FACTORY-FARMED animals with her promotion of one of the biggest, SMITHFIELD. Now she will make more millions with PHARMACEUTICALS that in studies have shown, can cause thyroid cancer and pancreatitis.(See Huffington Post article on Mother Jones).
http://www.happyhealthylonglife.com/happy_healthy_long_life/2012/01/reversing-diabetes.html
Dr. Barnard is right to discourage the use of white flour and sugar, but his idea that dietary fat CAUSES diabetes is unproven. Type II diabetics to tend have high levels of insulin circulating in their system (at least until the pancreas begins to burn out), and this insulin promotes fat storage, so there is a correlation between BEING fat and being diabetic, but this is not the same thing as saying that dietary fat is CAUSATIVE of diabetes. One of the first things you learn in Science 101 is the principle that "correlation is not causation".
We see all kinds of variation in the diets of traditional populations where diabetes was a rare disease - from high fat, to high protein, to high carbohydrate. So singling out some one macronutrient from natural whole foods as the cause of diabetes is not justified by the evidence. The diets of the Inuit and the Kitavans of Papua New Guinea, whose diet was something like 60% carbohydrate, were as different as it's possible to be, yet neither population was beset with diabetes. What did they have in common? Lack of access to refined sugar and processed grains.
Incidentally, the Japanese, yet another traditional population among whom diabetes was rare, have been seeing skyrocketing rates of the disease over the last several decades, and the only dietary factor I can ascribe that to is the introduction of processed foods primarily consisting of sugar and super-refined grains. Again correlation is not causation, and I'm not saying that this proves anything, but it certainly warrants further investigation, and does not support the notion that dietary fat is what causes diabetes.
I grew up in the south and sure there is plenty of fried chicken, mac & cheese, pulled pork, etc but there are also a lot of veggies, fish, beans, etc in southern cuisine. The perception of southern cooking is pretty much the same as Italian in this country. The symbol of Italian here is a huge plate of pasta with garlic bread - Olive Garden essentially. Not representative of how people in Italy eat.
Anyway, there is nothing inherently wrong with the stuff that Paula Deen makes. I think her bacon-wrapped mac & cheese sounds pretty good, but I would have a small piece of that and then a big salad or something.
My family eats food prepared similarly to Paula Deen's cooking, and none of us have health issues associated with those foods. The secret to eating rich food is monitoring your food intake. Eat a variety of food and never over eat. I'm 68 and my Father is 93, and both in great health.
I've personally lost 180lbs since Dec 2009. My blood pressure was 160/110, now its 120/80. My cholesterol was 256 mg/dL, now its 176mg/dL. I'm no longer Pre-Diabetic and I'm in the best shape of my life. It wasn't easy but I can say that everyone can do it if they have the right program.
If you're interested in my story please head over to Zdiets.net
Cheers.
Ryan E. Parker
And I don't have diabetes.