Professional kitchen question

After watching Hell's Kitchen for a few seasons, a few things I've noticed are:

Most of the contestants smoke.
Many of the contestants are heavily tattooed.
Some of the contestants wear piercings.

Tattoos obviously have no effect on cooking or hygiene. Do cigarettes affect the tasting abilities of the cooks or somehow affect their cooking? I have to admit, though, that cooks wearing a lot of metal in their noses or lips is what gives me the shudders. Would piercings have any problems related to cooking or working in a kitchen?

There is a very well known sommelier here in DC who apparently has tattoos and piercings out the wazoo and plays heavy metal. The Washington Post even wrote a very favorable article about him and he’s apparently very well respected. Of course he dons a nice suit when working around wine and that can hide a lot. I know I’ll run into him one day. I wonder if there any connection between him and the TV chefs you write about.

[Jenise]

After watching Hell's Kitchen for a few seasons, a few things I've noticed are:

Most of the contestants smoke.
Many of the contestants are heavily tattooed.
Some of the contestants wear piercings.

Tattoos obviously have no effect on cooking or hygiene. Do cigarettes affect the tasting abilities of the cooks or somehow affect their cooking? I have to admit, though, that cooks wearing a lot of metal in their noses or lips is what gives me the shudders. Would piercings have any problems related to cooking or working in a kitchen?

Joseph Carey and Daniel Rogov both smoke, and both will no doubt be along to tell you that they don't believe it affects their sense of taste. As an ex-smoker that's hard for me to imagine, but I can't argue with their experience.

The piercings are another issue--frankly, when I see people with same, it's not problems in the kitchen I wonder about!

I wonder how much of this is reflective of what's fashionable among chefs and how much is reflective of the producers wanting the show to appear edgy?

I wonder how much of this is reflective of what's fashionable among chefs and how much is reflective of the producers wanting the show to appear edgy?

Mike,
I think it's more likely to be a generational thing. As someone who comes into daily contact with college-age students, I've witnessed the number (and size) of tatoos and piercings grow at an astounding rate over the past decade. And, for the first time, I've got a graduate student working in my lab with a piercing (in the nose, as it happens).

Mark Lipton

A couple of thoughts after reading this thread, are there lawyers out there in cloud cuckoo land who specialize in discrimination against generously tattooed and multi-pierced specimens, and if in 40 years or so, there will be a resurgence of carnival freak shows featuring homo erectus, (some of whom may actually be sapien also) with saggy-skinned tattoos and droopy metal bits that need polishing.
Something to think about...LOL, well maybe not!

Agree, Mark, I think it's very much a younger generation thing. They regard piercings and tattoos ("ink") in the same way that we regarded ear piercing 30 years ago. I know 15 year olds who have butterflies on their ankles and nose rings. I don't know how much piercings would damage your tasting skills - even a tongue piercing is usually done in the middle of the tongue, where there aren't a lot of tastebuds.

I love tattoos, but I tend to keloid quite badly so the results would be pretty ugly. Oh, and I have the lowest pain threshold in the universe.

I can't speak at all to the body mutilation things, though I am pretty sure that's just generational.

As to the smoking. Some folks just taste better than others. (Save the cheap shots here). I suspect a lot of the better tasters become chefs, or wine or food critics. There may be some alteration in taste with smoking, but if so, I believe it was Hugh Johnson who said we adjust.

Smoking is probably more prevalent among chefs and cooks than among the populace at large. Stress is part of it I'm sure.

And I know I've mentioned this before, but here we go again. What follows is especially true if one is of a certain age.

Mot chefs worked as line cooks before they became chefs. It's the standard route. It's lot like being a serf or a slave. You are locked to that line while service is in progress. A bathroom break can wait. You can take the emergency call later.

However, if you need a cigarette the chef may just let you take a smoke break. He understands that. I actually knew cooks who took up smoking for this exclusive reason.

There is a huge variation in ability to taste from one individual to another, and I mean HUGE. You probably know folks who can't tell the difference between processed food and a meal prepared from the best fresh, local ingredients. Doesn't matter if they smoke or not. They could eat tacks for breakfast, lunch and dinner - wouldn't make any difference.

At the other end of that spectrum are what are known as the "supertasters". You could pour lye on their tongues and they could still taste circles around most folks. I suspect most chefs and critics are toward the top end of that scale. I can taste just fine. And Rogov seems to be doing just fine, too.

I can taste just fine. And Rogov seems to be doing just fine, too.

How do you know?

I can taste just fine. And Rogov seems to be doing just fine, too.

How do you know?

I know about me because I checked with my mouth and it gave me a thumbs up.

About Rogov, saw him on the wine podcast. And, like I said, he "seems" to be doing just fine.

As far as chefs having tattoos, most of the chefs I have ever met are far more creative than many people and I suspect the tattoos are a way some of them further illustrate and demonstrate the artistic/creative side of their personality.

Piercings are probably just another way that a chef shows their creativity and differentiates themselves from others. I wear cufflinks. There is probably someone in another culture that thinks that is weird. Also, I have seen plenty of nice looking women on the beach with navel piercings that look far better than my 95 year-old Grandma with earrings.

Smoking though? As I had mentioned numerous times on the old board, I smoked two packs of Marlboro Reds per day and when I quit my palate, sense of smell and my appreciation of food and wine drastically improved because I could actually taste and smell the finer nuances. Like Jenise, that is just my experience, but I recall a heavy smoking boss that often took myself and clients out to dinner. When the reserve wine menu was brought to the table he would lean over and whisper to me, “Get a bottle they would like…they don’t smoke, and after these Camels I am not going to know what is fine or foul.

Smoking though? As I had mentioned numerous times on the old board, I smoked two packs of Marlboro Reds per day and when I quit my palate, sense of smell and my appreciation of food and wine drastically improved because I could actually taste and smell the finer nuances. Like Jenise, that is just my experience, but I recall a heavy smoking boss that often took myself and clients out to dinner. When the reserve wine menu was brought to the table he would lean over and whisper to me, “Get a bottle they would like…they don’t smoke, and after these Camels I am not going to know what is fine or foul.

Nifty anecdote, if a tad non sequiturish.

I wonder how much of this is reflective of what's fashionable among chefs and how much is reflective of the producers wanting the show to appear edgy?

One of the contestants has a large ring in the middle of her lower lip. It weirds me out.

There is a huge variation in ability to taste from one individual to another, and I mean HUGE.//
At the other end of that spectrum are what are known as the "supertasters". You could pour lye on their tongues and they could still taste circles around most folks. I suspect most chefs and critics are toward the top end of that scale..

I agree about the variability of tasting ability (though it tends not to be linear, most people have genetic sensitivities/insensitivities to various substances). I'd disagree about most great chefs or critics being supertasters. In the nontaster/taster/supertaster categories, people who are supertasters tend not to like anything bitter. So they tend to not drink coffee (and often alcohol), avoid cruciferous vegetables, hot peppers, etc.

There is a huge variation in ability to taste from one individual to another, and I mean HUGE.//
At the other end of that spectrum are what are known as the "supertasters". You could pour lye on their tongues and they could still taste circles around most folks. I suspect most chefs and critics are toward the top end of that scale..

I agree about the variability of tasting ability (though it tends not to be linear, most people have genetic sensitivities/insensitivities to various substances). I'd disagree about most great chefs or critics being supertasters. In the nontaster/taster/supertaster categories, people who are supertasters tend not to like anything bitter. So they tend to not drink coffee (and often alcohol), avoid cruciferous vegetables, hot peppers, etc.

Yes, contrary to popular image, being a supertaster is more of a curse than a blessing. True supertasters as originally defined cannot eat virtually any green vegetable without it being slathered in butter and are mostly those maddeningly finicky eaters that we encounter periodically. In my case, I've got a sis-in-law who ate only mashed potatoes and the broth of chicken noodle soup growing up, culminating in an infamous family incident where her exasperated father dumped a plate of peas on her head. Two of her three sons have, alas, developed similarly restrictive eating habits (one lives on crustless white bread, the other on cheese pizza), though the third eats a fairly normal diet. Though they haven't been tested, I'd lay good odds that they'd prove to be supertasters.

Mark Lipton

Mark, agreed, I'd once read that many supermodels are supertasters - everything tastes so over the top to them that they don't really eat much at all. Who knows whether it's true or not...but I do know that paradoxically, being a supertaster means you're less likely to eat a wide range of food rather than the reverse.

Are y'all finished talking about "supertasters" now? I wasn't talking about them.

I said chefs tend toward the top end of the scale.

At the other end of that spectrum are what are known as the "supertasters". You could pour lye on their tongues and they could still taste circles around most folks. I suspect most chefs and critics are toward the top end of that scale. I can taste just fine. And Rogov seems to be doing just fine, too.

Are y'all finished talking about "supertasters" now? I wasn't talking about them.

Yeah you were.

But I take your point, I think most chefs and professional foodies can taste things we mere mortals often miss. I wonder if a palate can be trained though, or whether it's just what you're born with?

But I take your point, I think most chefs and professional foodies can taste things we mere mortals often miss. I wonder if a palate can be trained though, or whether it's just what you're born with?

Oh I don't think there's any doubt but what a palate can be trained. It's one of the things I was trying to do for 22 years.

I suspect the real thing holding you back is the ampallang.

I suspect the real thing holding you back is the ampallang.

I've been waiting for you to post the results of your piercing.

I posted them at http://www.lpsg.org , a wonderful organization dedicated to helping people like me.

I posted them at http://www.lpsg.org , a wonderful organization dedicated to helping people like me.

Ah, yes, I should have recognized your entry in Dr. Giunta's Phalloplasty Survey.

http://www.drgiunta.com/phalloplasty-study.html

Smoking is probably more prevalent among chefs and cooks than among the populace at large. Stress is part of it I'm sure.

I'm not trying to be cheeky, but always suspected that it was Frued's Oral Fixation thing at work here.