Chemosensory Perception

, Volume 7, Issue 2, pp 47–55 | Cite as

Differential Perception of Caffeine Bitter Taste Depending on Smoking Status

  • Nelly JacobEmail author
  • Jean-Louis Golmard
  • Ivan Berlin


Taste impairment may be associated with tobacco smoking. We assessed taste recognition and intensity among healthy middle-aged current smokers (N = 94, 21 %), former smokers (N = 48, 11 %) and non-smokers (N = 309, 69 %) recruited on a voluntary basis among hospital staff. By means of a whole-mouth gustatory test, participants tasted one concentration of the four basic tastes (NaCl 34 mM, sucrose 58 mM, acetic acid 60 mM, caffeine 1.5 mM for salty, sweet, sour and bitter tastes, respectively) and completed a questionnaire for taste recognition and intensity (ranging from 0 to 10). The recognition of salty, sweet and sour tastes was not influenced by smoking status. Bitter taste recognition was wrong among 13.4, 19.8 and 26.5 % of non-smokers, current smokers and former smokers, respectively (p = 0.043). The adjusted odds ratio (95 % confidence interval) of correct bitter taste recognition was 0.31 (0.14–0.69) among former and 0.74 (0.35–1.55) among current smokers (p = 0.016), compared to non-smokers while adjusting for gender, age, year of assessment and bitter taste intensity. The distribution of caffeine’s bitter taste intensity was bimodal regardless of the smoking status. The differential perception of caffeine’s bitter taste by current and former smokers is likely to be caused by a toxic process. As taste impairment persists in former smokers, the bioaccumulation of some tobacco/combustion products might be responsible for the disequilibrium in taste buds regeneration.


Taste perception Smoking status Humans Caffeine Bitter taste 


Compliance with Ethics Requirements

Conflict of Interest

Nelly Jacob declares that she has no conflict of interest.

Jean-Louis Golmard declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Ivan Berlin declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Data, collected anonymously, came from a public health sensitisation procedure on "World No Tobacco Day". According to the French law on Biomedical research, no informed consent and agreement of the hospital's Ethics Committee (Institutional Review Board) were required.


  1. Baker KA, Dicock EA, Kemm JR et al (1983) Effect of age, sex and illness on salt taste detection thresholds. Age Ageing 12:159–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bartoshuk LM (1989) Taste. Robust across the age span? Ann N Y Acad Sci 561:65–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beck F, Guignard R (2010) Prevalence of smoking in France in 2010. INPES, Département « Enquêtes et analyse statistiques »
  4. Benowitz NL (2010) Nicotine addiction. N Engl J Med 362:2295–2303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cannon DS, Baker TB, Piper ME et al (2005) Associations between phenylthiocarbamide gene polymorphisms and cigarette smoking. Nicotine Tob Res 7:853–858CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Carpenter CM, Wayne GF, Connolly GN (2007) The role of sensory perception in the development and targeting of tobacco products. Addiction 102:136–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dsamou M, Palicki O, Septeir C et al (2012) Salivary protein profiles and sensitivity to the bitter taste of caffeine. Chem Senses 37:87–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Duffy VB, Hayes JE, Sullivan BS et al (2009) Surveying food/beverage liking: a tool for epidemiological studies to connect chemosensation with health outcomes. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1170:558–568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Enoch M, Harris C, Goldman D (2001) Does a reduced sensitivity to bitter taste increase the risk of becoming nicotine addicted? Addict Behav 26:399–404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fisher ME, Cruickshanks KJ, Schubert CR et al (2013) Taste intensity in the Beaver Dam Offspring study. Laryngoscope 123:1399–1404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Frye CA, Demolar GL (1994) Menstrual cycle and sex differences influence salt preference. Physiol Behav 55:193–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gemousakakis T, Kotini A, Anninos P et al (2011) MEG evaluation of taste by gender difference. J Integr Neurosci 10:537–545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Grant R, Ferguson MM, Strang R et al (1987) Evoked taste thresholds in a normal population and the application of electrogustometry to trigeminal nerve disease. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 50:12–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gudziol H, Hummel T (2007) Normative values for the assessment of gustatory function using liquid tastants. Acta Otolaryngol 127:658–661CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Guo SW, Reed DR (2001) The genetics of phenylthiocarbamide perception. Ann Human Biol 28:111–142Google Scholar
  16. Hall NJ, Bartoshuk LM, Cain WS et al (1975) PTC blindness and the taste of caffeine. Nature 253:442–443CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hansen JL, Reed DR, Wright MJ et al (2006) Heritability and genetic covariation of sensitivity to PROP, SOA, quinine HCl, and caffeine. Chem Senses 31:403–413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hyde RJ, Feller RP (1981) Age and sex effects on taste of sucrose, NaCl, citric acid and caffeine. Neurobiol Aging 2:315–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Keast RS, Roper J (2007) A complex relationship among chemical concentration, detection threshold, and suprathreshold intensity of bitter compounds. Chem Senses 32:245–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Konstantinidis I, Chatziavramidis A, Pintz A et al (2010) Effects of smoking on taste: assessment with contact endoscopy and taste strips. Laryngoscope 120:1958–1963CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Krut LH, Perrin MJ, Bronte-Stewart B (1961) Taste perception in smokers and non-smokers. Br Med J 1(5223):384–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mangold GE, Payne TJ, Ma JZ et al (2008) Bitter taste receptor gene polymorphisms are an important factor in the development of nicotine dependence in African Americans. J Med Genet 45:578–582CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Meyerhof W, Batram C, Kuhn C et al (2010) The molecular receptive ranges of human TAS2R bitter taste receptors. Chem Senses 35:157–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mojet J, Heidema J, Christ-Hazelhof E (2003) Taste perception with age: generic or specific losses in supra-threshold intensities of five taste qualities? Chem Senses 28:397–413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Morabia A, Curtin F, Berstein MS (1999) Effects of smoking and smoking cessation on dietary habits of a Swiss urban population. Eur J Clin Nutr 53:239–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Pavlos P, Vasilios N, Antonia A et al (2009) Evaluation of young smokers and non-smokers with electrogustometry and contact endoscopy. BMC Ear Nose Throat Dis 9:9. doi: 10.1186/1472-6815-9-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rose JE (2006) Nicotine and nonnicotine factors in cigarette addiction. Psychopharmacology 184:274–285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sato K, Endo S, Tomita H (2002) Sensitivity of three loci on the tongue and soft palate to four basic tastes in smokers and non-smokers. Acta Otolaryngol 546:74–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Simpson EE, Rae G, Parr H et al (2012) Predictors of taste acuity in healthy older Europeans. Appetite 58:188–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Snedecor SM, Pomerleau CS, Mehringer AM et al (2006) Differences in smoking-related variables based on phenylthiocarbamide “taster” status. Addict Behav 31:2309–2312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Venneman MM, Hummel T, Berger K (2008) The association between smoking and smell and taste impairment in the general population. J Neurol 255:1121–1126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Yamauchi Y, Endo S, Yoshimura I (2002) A new whole-mouth gustatory test procedure. I. Thresholds and principal components analysis in healthy men and women. Acta Otolaryngol Suppl 546:39–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Service de Pharmacologie, Groupe Hospitalier Pitié-Salpêtrière, APHPParisFrance
  2. 2.Département de BiostatistiqueGroupe Hospitalier Pitié-Salpêtrière, APHPParisFrance
  3. 3.Service de PharmacologieGroupe Hospitalier Pitié-SalpêtrièreParis Cedex 13France

Personalised recommendations