Archive for December, 2010
Human Pheromones, The Scent of Eros, and Cultural Evolution
The article linked above tells of a free new database that you can search in an attempt to determine how certain words, names, or phrases have varied in use during the past. The first page you will see is a graph. In the lower right portion of the screen, click on “human pheromones” to see how the database search works, or simply use this link: Human Pheromones and Cultural Evolution. It will take you to a display of publications that have included the term “human pheromones.” When you click on “The Scent of Eros” you can view text from the pages that mention “human pheromones” 38 times. You can also view text from other books. I was pleased to see that my book has apparently had a significant cultural influence. I’m not quite sure how to measure the biological significance of the book, but it’s becoming clearer that the biology of human pheromones has influenced human culture. You may also want to look at my review of “The Great Pheromone Myth” as you consider what virtually every other book about pheromones tells us. Mammalian pheromones, including human pheromones are no myth and human pheromones are a part of human culture.read more December 19, 2010 • 7:06 PM
Marketing vs. the truth about human pheromones
Here’s an example of the truth about human pheromones compared to the latest marketing, which is designed to get you to buy a worthless fragrance product. Taken together, the following “red flag” statements make it seem like there is scientific support for their product claims.
1. Major universities have conducted scientific studies…
2. Men report astounding results…
3. Women make eye contact, smile at you more often…
TRUTH: Only two university studies, both done at Knox College, have demonstrated behavioral affects of pheromones. The results of the first study showed that women made eye contact and smiled more often during a 15-minute interaction that was recorded on videotape for later analysis. The second study replicated these results and added results from a questionnaire that showed women were more attracted to the man when he was wearing the same mixture of pheromones.
FALSE MARKETING: If you want to give this male pheromones thing a try, _______ Cologne is an excellent choice. It is a specially formulated blend of male pheromones…. Give the stuff about three weeks… Your life will not be the same again.
TRUTH: There is no indication of why their product would be an excellent choice. Their special formula is not disclosed; and there is no evidence that it contains male pheromones. Our studies showed a behavioral affect in 15 minutes. Why do you need to give their stuff about three weeks? Obviously, the only reason your life might not be the same again is that you will have wasted even more of your hard-earned money on a worthless product. This could lead to life-long depression if you did it frequently.
For now, I will leave the product unnamed, even though their marketers are making false claims that incorporate my research. In time, if these marketers continue to make false claims, I will begin to disclose their names in an attempt to help consumers rid the market of the people who have bastardized the concept of human pheromones.
Meanwhile, if you are interested in the truth about human pheromones, you will continue to find it at Pheromones.com.read more December 20, 2010 • 7:10 AM
Exotic Pheromones and Concentrates
The effect of pheromones on physiology and their affect on behavior has been scientifically detailed in species from yeasts to non-human primates. In no species does the affect on behavior of the different mixtures of pheromones depend on the use of supraphysiological amounts.
A supraphysiological amount is one to which an organism would never be naturally exposed. For example, organisms are never naturally exposed to concentrations of pheromones that are one thousand to one million times the amount produced by other organisms of the same species. However, supraphysiological amounts have been used in experiments on men and women, and products are marketed with claims that they contain the highest concentration of human pheromones. (more…)read more December 26, 2010 • 2:16 PM
Mammalian pheromones are not a myth
Pheromones a myth in mammals PHYSorg.com 2 Dec 2010:
James V. Kohl comments on this article (also posted to PHYSorg.com)
5. I am reminded of a reported incident from:
Gibbons, D.L. (1989) Unusual case: Sex in the woods. Medical Aspects of Human Sexuality, 23,10(Oct):63.
“Cindy, who was menstruating… had gone alone to a portable commode hidden in a thicket to change her tampon, unaware that a young stag was nearby… Smelling her menstrual secretions, the deer became sexually aroused. He bounded through the trees and knocked Cindy to the ground. Then while prancing up and down with his forefoot on her shoulder, the sexually excited deer sprinkled her with semen.”
The existence of mammalian pheromones is no joking matter, but this incident does give new meaning to the phrase “terms of endeerment.” The involvement of mammalian pheromones in sexual arousal should not be underestimated, much less negated by Dr. Doty’s opinions about olfactory/pheromonal or visual appeal. (more…)read more December 05, 2010 • 5:20 PM
Dialogue on pheromones: Avery Gilbert / James V. Kohl
I’ve edited and reproduced my comments here with an indicator of the point I was trying to address:
1. Some people may believe that the evidence for priming pheromones in mammals is weak and artifactual.
The required levels of biological organization (i.e., gene-cell-tissue-organ-organ system) have been detailed. So has the evolved neurophysiological mechanism that links mammalian pheromones to their priming effect on hormones. The evidence is not weak, it’s overwhelming!
2. Dr. Doty stretches the definition of pheromone to include or exclude his qualifiers.
I do not advocate stretching the original definition of pheromones. They are social odors and they release definite behaviors. The definite behaviors exist because of the developmental (hormone-driven) processes the pheromones effect.
3. Dr. Doty limits the definition of pheromone to include or exclude his qualifiers.
I do not advocate limiting the original definition. There is no science from any species that indicates that the concept infers (as Doty does on page 3) “…that a plurality of mammalian behaviors and endocrine responses is uniquely determined in an invariant way by single or small sets of chemical stimuli….” (more…)read more December 12, 2010 • 5:34 PM
Dr. Craig B Warren reviews "The Great Pheromone Myth"
Review (see page 10) excerpt:
“Does a pheromone exist that can enhance attraction, modify mood, or alter hormonal activity? Most likely–but right now, buyer beware! Only good science and time will reveal the answer.” — Dr. Gary Beauchampread more December 14, 2010 • 8:14 PM