American and Canadian Mensa Presentation

Annual Gathering 2010 at the Hyatt Regency

600 Town Center Drive, Dearborn, Michigan

Friday July 2, 2010

James V. Kohl

Human Pheromones: The Mind’s Eyes and behavior

How do personal preferences develop? The scientific realities of attraction, partner choice, commitment, and mindless animalistic behaviors are detailed for an adult general audience. This clinical laboratory scientist does his behavioral development research on people. And he tests people, not non-human animals. Find out what he’s learned about pheromones, hormones, and your behavior in the eighteen years since his last AG presentation. Avoid your next social mishap or relationship mistake. Watch, listen, question, and learn. Prepare yourself if you wish! Google “human pheromones” or Bing “Scent of Eros.”

Presentation on Human Pheromones scheduled for August 3, 2010

International Society of Human Ethology, August 1-5, 2010, Madison, Wisconsin

J. V. Kohl

Human Pheromones: Linking Neuroendocrinology and Ethology (revisited)

Abstract

The evolution of food choice and mate choice provides a bottom-up model that reveals we are genetically predisposed to respond to olfactory/pheromonal input with alterations that occur in hormone-secreting cells of tissue in the brain. With unparalleled reciprocity, the development of human personal preferences for visually perceived physical features is accompanied by a top-down model. The direct effect of the olfactory/pheromonal input on the central nervous system alters the genetically predisposed maturation of the neuroendocrine system and the reproductive system during a behavioral maturation sequence driven by the same hormone-secreting nerve cells. This direct effect of olfactory/pheromonal input is associated with other sensory input from the social environment that is not required for the development of human personal preferences (e.g., visual input associated with visually perceived physical features). Cultural effects on behavior are effects of gene-culture co-evolution that allows us to think about the relative salience of sensory input.

Talk Proposal

Visual input from our social environment co-exists in reports of observed behavioral affects that tend to confuse co-existence with cause and effect. This confusion arises from the failure to incorporate evidence of an evolved neurophysiological mechanism that directly links what we see to changes in hormones that affect our social behavior. The failure to mention this required neurophysiological mechanism is exemplified in reports that link visual stimuli to co-existing personal preferences for the physical features of others. Human personal preferences for these physical features are most often linked to visual input in the absence of any mammalian model for their development.

Any evolved link to mammalian behavior from a sensory stimulus in the social environment must incorporate five levels of biological organization that allow the link to evolve: 1. gene; 2. cell; 3. tissue; 4. organ; 5. organ system. During embryonic and prenatal development of the mammalian central nervous system (CNS), genes in cells of tissue in the brain (i.e., the most important organ of any organ system associated with the development of behavior) predispose the ability of hypothalamic tissue to generate the pulsatile secretion of gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH). The hypothalamic GnRH pulse modulates the concurrent maturation of the reproductive system, the neuroendocrine system, and the CNS during behavioral development.

It is generally agreed that the social behavior of many other animals is affected most by olfactory/pheromonal input, which acts on GnRH pulsatility. A mammalian model details how olfactory/pheromonal input alters genes in cells of tissue in the brain. This bottom-up gene-cell–tissue-organ-organ system model has its evolutionary basis in animal models of food choice and mate choice, both of which are required for survival of all species that sexually reproduce. With unparalleled reciprocity, the development of human personal preferences for visually perceived physical features is accompanied by a top-down explanation. The direct effect of the olfactory/pheromonal input on the CNS alters the genetically predisposed maturation of the neuroendocrine system and the reproductive system during the behavioral maturation sequence that is driven by the hormone-secreting (i.e., GnRH) nerve cells.

This genetically predisposed behavioral maturation sequence incorporates evolutionary aspects of self/non-self recognition (immune system function) and evolutionary aspects of sex differences and their recognition. Cultural effects on behavior are attributed to gene-culture co-evolution, rather than to any vague means by which culture might otherwise influence behavior.

Food preferences and mate preferences

Please note the distinct difference in the interpretation of results from the same study. Nature posits that bacteria are sniffing out their food, while The Scientist posits bacteria are sniffing out each other.

Bacteria sniff out their food. The simplest form of cellular life can scent nutrients from a distance. Nijland, R. & Burgess, J. G. Biotechnology Journal (2010)  Source Nature

http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100816/full/news.2010.411.html

Bacteria sniff each other out. When sensing the presence of other species, bacteria meet the textbook definition for olfaction.  Nijland, R. & Burgess, J. G. “Bacterial olfaction,” Biotechnology Journal, 2010.

Source: TheScientist
http://www.the-scientist.com/news/display/57622/

There is only one animal model for food choice and for mate choice. Since the animal model is so clearly based on olfaction–even in bacteria–can anyone detail how other animals came to rely on visual perception of attractive physical features for mate choice? The all-too-common visual approach to human physical attraction is akin to the visual perception of attractive foods being causal to the development of food preferences.  I discussed this in my July 2, 2010 presentation to the American Mensa Society, as seen in these two 5-minute excerpts from the presentation:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTtcyr898rY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c5zzT031EvU

How pheromones work by James V. Kohl

The response to pheromones, is a “survival of the species” concept that has been repeatedly detailed in examples of classical conditioning. In more evolved species like mammals, classical conditioning of the response to pheromones involves at least one other sensory stimulus from the social environment (e.g., an environment that includes other members of the same species).

In classical conditioning, one sensory stimulus is repeatedly paired with another sensory stimulus. This repeated pairing allows the second sensory stimulus to cause the same behavioral response that was initially caused by the first. In fact, after the response is conditioned to occur, the second sensory stimulus can then cause the same behavioral response even in the absence of the first stimulus. For example, after visual input is paired with the effect of pheromones on hormones and behavior, what we see can cause us to respond as if the pheromones were causing changes in the hormones that affect our behavior. (more…)

Sold on the human VNO?

Recent discoveries show that human pheromones are signals that are processed by cells in our main olfactory system. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17917120

Accordingly, as they do in all other mammals, pheromones activate the hypothalamus in humans. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19235878

Human pheromones cause behavior to change via their effects on hormones secreted by the hypothalamus. http://senseofsmell.org/papers/Human_Pheromones_Final%207-15-09.pdf

Though it is widely reported to exist, the adult human vomeronasal organ (VNO) is not functional. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10531049; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11369678; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15470677

It contains few nerve cells and consists largely of epithelial cells, which means it has no sensory function. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/4068105

Most cells of the adult human VNO express the protein markers of skin cells, not nerve cells. No cells have synaptic contacts, and there is no evidence that any nerve connects with the human VNO. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10944499; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12107500

Finally, no cells express the protein that is the primary indicator of mature olfactory nerve cells. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/336785

If you think you’ve found scientific support for misleading claims about a functional human VNO, look further and see what other researchers say in the links to the articles above.

These next few links are to articles that focus on research that apparently is supported by a woman who claims to be the co-discoverer of human pheromones based on the acclamations of television.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9883309 comment on http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9494686. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15327919 comment on http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11897264, and on http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9494686.

Effects of pheromones attributed to touch (in mice)

Paternal mice bond with their offspring through the power of touch Prior work (1) from two of these same authors correctly attributed changes in the production of new brain cells to the effect of pheromones on  neurons in the olfactory bulb that express gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH), which send projections to the hypothalamus. This results in the release of luteinizing hormone and follicular-stimulating hormone (FSH) by the anterior pituitary.  Together, LH and FSH control the release of steroid hormones, such as estrogen, that influence sexual behavior via effects on neurogenesis. Estrogen promotes the release of prolactin (PRL) and provides a regulatory feedback loop for LH and FSH release.

Looking at the downstream effects of GnRH on other hormones, and then attributing effects on neurogenesis and behavior to these other hormones derails the logic of an well-established link from pheromones to behavior.

In the report linked above, the effect of pheromones is attributed to touch. Clearly, however, it is the effect of pheromones that stimulates the production of new brain cells, as has been detailed in other works, including at least one by Dr. Weiss and his colleagues.

(1) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17603480, also see the story at http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/75900.php “Weiss said “We found that pheromones, and particularly dominant male pheromones, can stimulate the production of new brain cells,…”

Pheromones of pregnant women effect prolactin in men

See the short video clip.

Earlier evidence: pheromones influence testosterone in men

Berliner, David L; Jennings‑White, Clive L., Adams, Nathan W. (1996) Pregnane steroids as neurochemical initiators of change in human hypothalamic function and related pharmaceutical compositions and methods. United States Patent # 5,563,13

The above patent appears to have incorporated the false concept that human pheromones act via the human vomeronasal organ (VNO), which has been shown to be non-functional. Nevertheless, this group (see below) might have been the first to show effects of a progesteronic (luteal phase) pheromone on testosterone levels in men.

Berliner, D.L., Monti‑Bloch, L., Jennings‑White, C., & Diaz‑Sanchez, V. (1996) Functionality of the human vomeronasal organ (VNO): Evidence for steroid receptors. Journal of Steroid Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, 58, 3, 259‑265.

Scent of a woman: Men’s Testosterone Responses to Women’s Scent

Miller and Maner (2009) helps to establish the link from human pheromones to behavior. It shows that human pheromones elicit changes in hormone levels. There’s a well detailed pathway to changes in testosterone (T) that starts with gene activation in hormone-secreting cells of hypothalamic tissue in the brain, which is the organ that controls our behavior. What this means is that human pheromones are chemicals found in our social environment that directly activate a gene-cell-tissue-organ-organ system pathway, which directly links pheromones to behavior.

Scent of a Woman (from Psychological Science)
by Saul L. Miller and Jon K. Maner
“The current research provides evidence that ovulatory cues are detectable via chemosensory signaling and, moreover, that these cues are linked with functionally relevant endocrinological responses in men.”

Click here for Free Full Text

The Great Pheromone Myth (opinion/review)

“If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way.” Bertrand Russell (1872 – 1970)

The pheromone myth:  Is a new concept needed?

Synopsis:

In 1959, pheromones were originally defined as “…substances which are secreted to the outside by an individual and received by a second individual of the same species, in which they release a specific reaction, for example, a definite behavior or a developmental process.” Dr. Richard Doty misrepresents the original concept of pheromones when he indicates the concept infers “… that a plurality of mammalian behaviors and endocrine responses is uniquely determined in an invariant way by single or small sets of chemical stimuli….” (p. 3).  Through his attempt to change the concept of mammalian pheromones, he also attempts to convince others that there is no such thing as mammalian pheromones. Simply put, he builds a theoretical “straw man,” and then attacks it. In truth, it is inconceivable that any sensory stimulus from the social environment (e.g, an environment containing other members of the same species) determines anything about mammalian behavior in an invariant way.

(more…)