Learn about pheromones from scent of eros creator James Kohl

Book

The Scent of Eros is the definitive human pheromone primer.

First released in 1995 and updated in paperback in 2002, Kohl's concept of human pheromones has become the accepted scientific standard in the study of human attraction.

James Vaughn Kohl - Pheromone Researcher

The first to accurately conceptualize human pheromones, and began presenting his findings to the scientific community in 1992.

He is certified with:
• American Society for Clinical Pathology
• American Medical Technologists

Biology

Scientific evidence continues to validate the concept of human pheromones as it was first portrayed for a general readership in The Scent of Eros: Mysteries of Odor in Human Sexuality (1995).

• Applied Science
• Scientific Support
• Documentation

About Human Pheromones

Human Pheromones do not create desire;
they enhance it!

Human pheromone-enhanced products increase your natural appeal. Marketing claims that guarantee you will get more sex are unscientific and unrealistic. If you are unappealing, human pheromones cannot magically make you appealing.

Detailed mechanisms: The puzzle of what to do next?

Posted on March 7, 2014 by James Kohl.

Epigenetics: The sins of the father The roots of inheritance may extend beyond the genome, but the mechanisms remain a puzzle by Virginia Hughes 05 March 2014 Excerpt: To many modern biologists, that’s “scary-sounding”, says Oliver Rando, a molecular biologist at the University of Massachusetts Medical School in Worcester, whose work suggests that such inheritance does indeed happen in animals3. If it is true, he says, “Why hasn’t this been obvious to all the brilliant researchers in the past hundred years of genetics?”. My comment: Nearly all the brilliant researchers in the past hundreds of years of genetics have been taught to believe what population geneticists decided to believe. However, the population geneticists never learned about the basic principles of biology or the levels of biological organization required to link the epigenetic landscape to the physical landscape of DNA in the organized genomes of species from microbes to man. With no understanding of biology, and no experimental evidence to support their theories, population geneticists have since simply decided that mutation-initiated natural selection must be reduced to mutation-driven evolution. What choice do they have? No one ever showed what was naturally selected, or how genes were fixed in the populations of organisms that evolved. Now, they must believe that mutation-driven evolution “just happens.” It must, because statistical analyses say it happens … somehow. Nothing else matters to a theorist but the math, as we’ve recently seen, especially when researchers wrote in 2011: “…we will not consider geographical and ecological factors because of space limitation. Our primary purpose is to clarify the roles of mutation and selection in the evolution of reproductive isolation…“ Anyone who is familiar with how Darwin’s theory was repeatedly inseminated with ideas from population genetics will recognize how fertilizing the minds of theorists led to the bastardization of Darwin’s theory and...

Combating evolution with facts about ecological adaptations

Posted on March 7, 2014 by James Kohl.

Science 7 March 2014: Vol. 343 no. 6175 pp. 1088-1089. DOI: 10.1126/science.1247472 PERSPECTIVE: MEDICINE Combating Evolution to Fight Disease Susan M. Rosenberg Christine Queitsch Excerpt: “Molecular biology and evolutionary biology have been separate disciplines and scientific cultures: The former is mechanistic and focused on molecules; the latter is theoretical and focused on populations. However, these domains are beginning to converge in laboratories addressing molecular mechanisms that explain how evolutionary processes work…” My comment: Darwin probably anticipated the insemination of population genetics that led to the bastardization of his detailed observations in the “Modern Synthesis.” He politely insisted that ‘conditions of life’ be considered before natural selection. Darwin could not have suspected that what has since become known about conserved molecular mechanisms, which link the epigenetic landscape to the physical landscape of DNA in the organized genomes of microbes to man, would reveal the biological fact that life is nutrient-dependent. Therefore, Darwin must have based the entirety of works on at least one assumption about his ‘conditions of life.’ However, there are two ‘conditions of life.’ Not even Darwin could have anticipated that what has since become known would reveal the biological fact that the physiology of reproduction is controlled by the metabolism of nutrients to species-specific pheromones. Therefore, until publication of “Pheromones: a new term for a class of biologically active substances” in 1959, everything else added to Darwin’s astute observation-based claims was added on faith. Evolutionary theorists convinced biologists to believe that mutation-initiated natural selection was possible, which meant that sexual selection must also somehow result from mutations. Simply put, there was no other acceptable explanation! Anyone who objected to being called a mutant was silenced. Biologists who somehow knew, like Darwin, that mutation-driven evolution was not possible, were not accepted among members of the academic priesthood who became the gatekeepers of scientific information. It is...

Mimicry based on Darwin’s conditions of life

Posted on March 6, 2014 by James Kohl.

Supergene Discovered in Lookalike Butterflies Re: “Maybe this particular gene family, involved in sex determination throughout the animal kingdom, is also involved in making deer antlers or peacock tails.” My comment: That seems to be biologically plausible. One gene family and biophysically constrained chromosomal rearrangements could be involved at the advent of sexual reproduction in unicellular organisms and also in determination of the morphological and behavioral phenotypes of all other species that sexually reproduce. That idea was unknowingly suggested in the context of Darwin’s “conditions of life.” Dobzhanksy (1972) extended Darwin’s ideas about ‘conditions of life’ and mimicry to flies. We extended the idea that ‘conditions of life’ are nutrient-dependent and pheromone-controlled in flies and all species from yeasts to mammals in a 1996 review article From Fertilization to Adult Sexual Behavior. Others extended our model of genetically-predisposed epigenetically-effected conserved molecular mechanisms that link the epigenetic landscape to the physical landscape of DNA in organized genomes to life history transitions in honeybees, via hormone-organized and hormone-activated differences in insects. We wrote: “Small intranuclear proteins also participate in generating alternative splicing techniques of pre-mRNA and, by this mechanism, contribute to sexual differentiation in at least two species, Drosophila melanogaster and Caenorhabditis elegans… That similar proteins perform functions in humans suggests the possibility that some human sex differences may arise from alternative splicings of otherwise identical genes (p. 337).” Most people ignored the idea that the conserved molecular mechanisms we detailed in our section on molecular epigenetics might link Darwin’s ‘conditions of life’ to sexual reproduction in all species that sexually reproduce. Even now, the focus seems to be on what constraint-breaking mutations might do, in theory. What Kunte et al. (2014) have shown appears to add more experimental evidence that refutes theories based on population genetics. The experimental evidence supports...

Explanatory duality: Science in flies is not Nature in butterflies

Posted on March 6, 2014 by James Kohl.

Science 7 March 2014: Vol. 343 no. 6175 p. 1055 DOI: 10.1126/science.343.6175.1055-f This Week in Science Evolutionary Duality When ecological divergence involves traits that also contribute to mating behavior, such divergence could lead to rapid reproductive isolation and speciation. However, there are very few experimental demonstrations of such “dual” traits. Chung et al. (p. 1148, published online 13 February) now demonstrate that specific cuticular hydrocarbons are a dual trait that affects both desiccation resistance and mate choice in the widely distributed Australian species Drosophila serrata. These compounds have largely been lost from its rainforest-restricted, desiccation-sensitive, closely related sibling D. birchii. My comment: Fatty acid metabolism and pheromone production link a single gene to ecological adaptations and species diversity in flies. See, for contast: Nature Published online 05 March 2014 doi:10.1038/nature13066 Evolutionary biology: Sex, lies and butterflies Ecological variation and adaptations associated with a single gene and with nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled mate choice in flies became meaningful mutations in the regulatory sequences of a single gene in butterflies associated with mimicry. My comment: Does any experimental evidence suggests the molecular mechanisms that enable species diversity are different in flies and butterflies?

Ignorance and arrogance: a pernicious combination

Posted on February 28, 2014 by James Kohl.

Jay R. Feierman, M.D., who moderates the ISHE’s human ethology yahoo group has again decided to publicly defame me. See for example: “I agree with you that there is a concern over the material that James Kohl wants to publish to this group. Much of it makes little or no sense. And, most people on the group who could constructively give him feedback have given up trying to dialog with him because of his pernicious combination of ignorance and arrogance. He never admits that he is ever wrong even when people who know much more than he does about specific topics tell him what he is saying is incorrect or makes no sense. I too am concerned that people who just read the group and don’t comment, and there are hundreds of them, will believe that what he is saying that is going unchallenged is correct. I’ve blocked 75% of what he has submitted to the group in the past few days because of my concerns. As a result, I’m only going to publish his submissions to the group if they make sense to me. As a point of interest he’s been removed from being able to post to the Yahoo evolutionary-psychology group for many months. I’m sorry to have to do this but I don’t think we can allow this group to be an open ended, non-peer reviewed vehicle for his voluminous postings. I’m going to cc this to Wulf Schiefenhovel, ISHE’s President, so he knows what is occurring.” My comment: After editing many of my posts during the past few days, Feierman now also admits to blocking 75% of what I have submitted — because it makes little or no sense to him. Evidently, that fact makes me ignorant and arrogant, and WRONG . Feierman doesn’t understand...

Science at its best

Posted on February 26, 2014 by James Kohl.

2012 : WHAT IS YOUR FAVORITE DEEP, ELEGANT, OR BEAUTIFUL EXPLANATION? Helen Fisher Biological Anthropologist, Rutgers University; Author, Why Him? Why Her? How to Find and Keep Lasting Love Excerpt 1: To me, epigenetics is the most monumental explanation to emerge in the social and biological sciences since Darwin proposed his theories of Natural Selection and Sexual Selection. Excerpt 2: I am hardly the first to hail this new field of biology as revolutionary—the fundamental process by which nature and nurture interact. But to me as an anthropologist long trying to take a middle road in a scientific discipline intractably immersed in nature-versus-nurture warfare, epigenetics is the missing link. This is what Helen Fisher wrote about the book I co-authored with Robert Francoeur, which was published in 1995 and in 2002. “This is science at its best, with adventure, ideas, and lots of facts… You will never look at your lover or your family the same way again.” –Helen Fisher, Ph.D., author of “The Anatomy of Love” Here are links to the last two review articles on epigenetics that I published: Kohl, J.V. (2012) Human pheromones and food odors: epigenetic influences on the socioaffective nature of evolved behaviors. Socioaffective Neuroscience & Psychology, 2: 17338. Kohl, J.V. (2013) Nutrient-dependent/pheromone-controlled adaptive evolution: a model. Socioaffective Neuroscience & Psychology, 3: 20553. Here’s a link to a forthcoming conference April 11 & 12, 2014, which includes information on the speakers and what they will discuss. The goal of the conference is to investigate the interface between epigenetic research and the emotional process of the human family. It will explore the regulation of genetic expression by the social environment as well as the imprint of family relationships on the social and emotional functioning of each family member, including genetic expression. If the stated goal of the conference is achieved, it...

Pseudoscience and monogamy

Posted on February 27, 2014 by James Kohl.

Stupider With Monogamy by Carl Zimmer 2/27/14 Excerpt: “The evolution of learning remains a puzzle for scientists. A smart animal can learn how to find more food or how to avoid predators. But if learning were such an unalloyed good, then one might expect all animals to be as smart as we are.” My comment: Pseudoscience and monogamy are consistently paired in the context of evolutionary theory. Other animals learn to respond to odors associated with nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled ecological adaptations via conserved molecular mechanisms. The conserved molecular mechanisms are manifested in species from microbes to man. Experience-dependent alternative splicings of pre-mRNA in insects and mammals determine which odor receptor genes are created and/or expressed, and which genes become pseudogenes when they are no longer needed in the context of experience-dependent differentiation of cell types in individuals of different species. Framing the conserved molecular mechanisms of how ecological variation results in experience-dependent cell type ecological adaptations in the context of the evolution of learning, which somehow occurs, prevents the understanding of this biological fact: Learning is required for ecological adaptations and species diversification to occur via ecological, social, neurogenic, and socio-cognitive niche construction. There is a model of niche construction and increasing organismal complexity that can be compared to the theory of mutation-driven evolution, but it has not been compared because most science journalists continue to frame their reports in the context of theory, not biologically based facts. In this report, we see how the epigenetic effect of the odor on learning is casually dismissed as if nothing was known about how ecological adaptations lead to hormone-organized and hormone-activated invertebrate and vertebrate behavior. Could monogamy have made us too stupid to recognize conserved molecular mechanisms, or have we been taught by evolutionary theorists to ignore biological facts? Kohl (2013) “In flies,...

The importance of smell for women

Posted on February 27, 2014 by James Kohl.

Sex differences in response to physical and social factors involved in human mate selection: The importance of smell for women Abstract: A survey study examining the relative importance of various social and physical traits in heterosexual attraction was conducted. Data from 198 male and female heterosexual college students revealed that women ranked body odor as more important for attraction than “looks” or any social factor except “pleasantness.” Moreover, in contrast to response to fragrance use, liking someone’s natural body odor was the most influential olfactory variable for sexual interest for both men and women. Men rated a woman’s good looks as most desirable and as more important than any other factor except pleasantness. Sex differences in the relative ranking of several social factors were consistent with prior research. Cited in: The Relationship Between Oral Contraceptive Use and Sensitivity to Olfactory Stimuli Excerpt 1: “Previous work has found that women rate a man’s scent as a particularly important factor in selecting a potential mate—of greater importance than a man’s physical appearance and voice, as well as many other factors, such as how many friends he has or how much money he earns (Herz & Inzlicht, 2002).” Excerpt 2: “In the present study, hormonal status was found only to affect olfactory sensitivity to the social odors, musk, androsterone and androstenone.” ———————————————————————————— Results from a study of androstenol and androsterone are reported here, which links to a presentation by James V. Kohl of experiments performed by by Linda Kelahan under the professorship of Dr. Heather Hoffmann Human pheromones, epigenetics, physiology, and the development of...

Stress-induced microRNA changes

Posted on February 27, 2014 by James Kohl.

on 2/27/14 at 3:25 pm I submitted this excerpt for posting to the ISHE’s human ethology yahoo group moderated by Jay R. Feierman. Re: MicroRNAs Change after Stressful Events Press conference presenter Karen Scott, a postdoctoral fellow in the laboratory of John Cryan at University College Cork in Ireland, is also interested in stress sensitivity and stress resistance. Scott described her work tracking molecular changes following a stressful event. Scott measured changes in microRNA (miRNA) levels in the hippocampus of two strains of mice (stress-sensitive BALB/c and stress-resistant C57BL/6J) following 10 days of exposure to the social defeat test. miRNA are tiny snippets of messenger RNA that block or degrade other RNA messages. Following stress, expression of miR-16 — which has been implicated in the development of depression — was elevated in BALB/c mice. Conversely, C57BL/6J showed higher levels of miR-34c. “These studies show that there is a correlation between behavioral and physiological responses to social defeat,” Scott said. However, she noted, future studies will need to explore whether manipulating miRNAs in the brain can alter symptoms of depression. on 2/27/14 at 4:10 pm Feierman posted it to the group with other articles under the header: Inside Science: Scientists Consider New Ways to Diagnose, Treat Depression on 2/27/14 at 8:10 pm, I submitted this for posting the ISHE’s human ethology yahoo group moderated by Jay R. Feierman. Ecology Diversity Down Below Andrew M. Sugden Despite a surge of research efforts in recent years, the challenges faced by soil biologists remain daunting. Knowledge of even the basic elements of the biodiversity that is so visible above ground—in particular, species diversity and distribution—remains far more rudimentary where life below the soil surface is concerned. Soil fungi are a case in point. A key component of the soil ecosystem, its global species diversity, has tended to be estimated...

Evolutionist or adaptationist?

Posted on February 24, 2014 by James Kohl.

Dobzhansky, T. (1973). Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution . The American Biology Teacher(March), 125–129. Dobzhansky begins, ‘‘There is, of course, nothing conscious or intentional in the action of natural selection.’’ Instead, Natural selection is at one and the same time a blind and creative process. Only a creative and blind process could produce, on the one hand, the tremendous biologic success that is the human species and, on the other, forms of adaptedness as narrow and as constraining as those of the overspecialized fungus, beetle, and flies mentioned above (p. 127).” Nei, M. (2013). Mutation-Driven Evolution. “Selective advantage of the mutation is determined by the type of DNA change, and therefore natural selection is an evolutionary process initiated by mutation. It does not have any creative power in contrast to the statements made by some authors ( p. 196).” Wilson, D.S. (2007). Evolution for Everyone. ” I am an evolutionist, which means that I use the principles of evolution to understand the world around me. I would be an evolutionary biologist if I restricted myself to the topics typically associated with biology, but I include all things human along with the rest of life. That makes me an evolutionist without any qualifiers. I and my fellow evolutionists study the length and breadth of creation, from the origin of life to religion (p. 1).” Kohl, J.V. (unpublished). “Nothing about mutation-initiated natural selection or mutation-driven evolution makes sense in the light of biology. Creation of species diversity is obviously due to ecological variations and nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled ecological adaptations.” Are you an evolutionist or adaptationist? What’s the difference? See for review: Let’s Start Calling Ourselves Evolutionists! Post: February 23, 2014 8:41 am Author: David Sloan Wilson Excerpt: The word evolution became tainted during the first half of the 20th century when it was invoked to...