-
-
-
-
A buddy of mine is on the Board of our County Health Department and they have written two definitive White Papers on the subject, which spell out the rules clearly for the County Health Codes. One says you must wear the gloves at all times, and the other says you don't have to.
-
I can't stand Fieri, but I'm with him on this one.
And saying again, since you haven't heard the others: GLOVES PROTECT YOUR HANDS FROM CONTAMINATION, THEY DO NOT PROTECT THE FOOD. Unless someone has broken skin, it's much safer to handle food with bare, clean hands, than with gloves on.
When my bare hands are dirty/contaminated/sticky, I know it. I wash constantly. Gloves give a false sense of security to the public, and the the wearer of the gloves.
-
-
-
I think it is important to try-
if it is good enough for medical professionals---why not food professionals
btw I have a Masters in Public Heallth
It says alot about his attidude to his customers›17 Replies-
re: jpr54_1
I don't know...it sounds like he has given it some thought and as a customer, I am okay with a chef who is very conscious about washing his hands vs. one who is wearing gloves because the health department says so, but doesn't bother to change them that often. Contrary to what you feel, I don't think it says anything negative about his attitude towards his customers.
-
re: jpr54_1
Um, because Medical Professionals have some medical training or even degrees, and food "professionals" are stoned high school kids.
Gloves do not protect the food. They protect your hands. How many times have you seen some kid wearing gloves picking their nose? How many times have you seen some kid wearing gloves dropping food on the floor and putting the food back on the tray? (Answer: Lots of times.)
Gloves do nothing to improve food safety. Gloves do not cure stupid. Gloves exist only to make bureaucrats feel good about themselves and as a visible symbol to make consumers think bureaucrats are doing something about food safety.
-
-
re: jpr54_1
In a hospital, for example, you are more likely to have especially dangerous or difficult-to-treat bacteria; you have patients with compromised health or immune systems; and you have direct portals into parts of peoples' bodies that are extremely vulnerable to infection (central lines, open wounds, arterial lines, intubated patients, etc).
In a restaurant, the risks simply aren't the same. You need a larger dose of most bacteria (or their assorted toxins) to actually become sick from exposure, and more often than not, that implies poor food handling practices AFTER cross contamination (which, frankly, cannot be stopped - it can only be limited). And beyond that, I am not convinced that exposure to non-infecting doses of common bacteria is actually bad for the average person. This is admittedly debatable, but there is some evidence that regular low level exposure might make for a more robust immune system, fewer allergies, and fewer autoimmune illnesses.
It's not that gloves are a bad thing. It's just that they can be a kind of distraction from the efforts that make a bigger difference, and worse they can provide a kind of false sense of security in a job setting where - face it - not everyone gets especially good training in safety measures in the first place. Ideally, a restaurant worker should assume the food they're working with has been exposed to cross contamination (cause gloves or not, chances are it has), and as such does not leave it unrefrigerated for long periods and washes it shortly before service.
ETA: I do think gloves make sense for some specific situations - people assembling food at subway, for instance, where food is sitting out for longer periods of time and the job is limited to some specific duties. They're just not a good catch all for all-around food prep.
-
re: jpr54_1
When taking classes in culinary/hospitality, we were also told about the false sense of security that wearing a glove brings. Why are clean hands not enough for you? Can you guarantee that the glove is cleaner? I've worked in a kitchen and saw what people did with gloves on.... yuck. I would rather wash my hands repeatedly.
-
-
I agree with Guy on this one. People are more likely to wash a hand when accidentally contaminating it than to go change a glove. People forget when they're wearing gloves. I've seen gloved hands assemble a sandwich, move a garbage can closer for access (by pinching the lip), and go back to making sandwiches. I think those that wear gloves are often trying to protect their hands not protect the food.
›2 Replies-
-
re: seamunky
And gloves are a pain. If you've been wearing gloves for more than a minute, your hands get super sweaty, and you have to wash and COMPLETELY dry them before you can put new gloves on - especially powder-free gloves will not go on even slightly damp hands. Takes too long, not worth it, and all those gloves just end up in the landfill.
-
-
-
re: jpr54_1
Thanks for the link.
I actually agree with Guy. Wearing gloves does not prevent cross-contamination. Also, wearing gloves can give a false sense of security.I've seen cooks at restaurants that are very good about changing gloves every time they touch raw meat or raw eggs. I've also been to restaurants that keep the the same pair on after making change or after touching raw meat. It's kind of a crap shoot.
-
-
Not sure where you're going with this, but the times I've seen him touch ingredients is as they go into the dish for cooking. There are times he'll try to sneak a taste, but from what I remember he uses a fork or some type of utensil.
Wearing gloves during the food prep stage is rather new. However, I remember people serving food always wore gloves, even the school lunch ladies wore gloves back in the 70's.
›3 Replies











