Several articles

[einstein]

I don't think I've

seen these exact reports before, although I have seen some similar reports.




http://wwwpsy.uni-muenster.de/inst2/maolst/boo

ks/book06.html (http://wwwpsy.uni-muenster.de/inst2/maolst/books/book06.html)
This study exposed women to -nol and -rone and had them rate pictures of men. Gives a pretty

good insight on the "role of -rone" debate in the current threads.



http:/

/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=1958560&dopt=Abstract (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=1958560&dopt=Abstract)
16-Ene-steroid

s in the human testis.
Not too useful, but I find it interesting. Human testis contain precursers for -nol and

-none, but no 5-alpha-reductase to convert the precursors into -nol and -none.



http://cas.bellarmine.edu/tie

tjen/images/androstenol_as_a_pheromone_promo.htm (http://cas.bellarmine.edu/tietjen/images/androstenol_as_a_pheromone_promo.htm)
A long article on the evolutionary purpose of -nol (promotes

pillow talk) Makes a reference to JVK

[nonscents]

In the 3rd article there is the

following:



While some human hairs can be argued to serve various purposes, such as protecting the head

from the sun, or sexual signaling, or reducing friction during sex (pubic hairs), the underarm hairs are not located

to keep us warm, nor to protect us from the sun, or even to be visible at a distance. The only plausible purpose

appears to emit odors or pheromones. They do this efficiently. Only one in ten shaved armpits are described as

odorous 24 hours after washing, while nine out of ten unshaved armpits are described as odorous (Shelley, Hurley &

Nicols, 1953, as cited in Stoddart, 1990, pp. 66-67). The concentration of hairs here, served by multiple apocrine

glands, must be an adaptation for the production and dissemination of odors. [para 7]

So do those of

you who shave your pubes find that sex is uncomfortably frictionful? And does one really become more odorous by

shaving one's armpits?

[camusflage]

So do those of

you who shave your pubes find that sex is uncomfortably frictionful? And does one really become more odorous by

shaving one's armpits?
I cannot speak to the odorous question, as I get by with a shot of cologne or

purell every day, but as for your first question, no, not in the least. To the contrary, it allows you to feel

everything so much better than being all hairy and stuff. :)

[Pancho1188]

Nonscents: Don't you mean,

"Does shaving your armpits make you less odorous?" The article as you quoted it states that one in ten shaved

are odorous while nine in ten unshaved are odorous.

I agree with this. My armpits have a distinct odor

after a while. It's definitely the hair and the sweat and whatever else is going on under there...

[DrSmellThis]

Shaving any body hair tends to

reduce pheromones.

[jvkohl]

Article # 3 by colleague Ed Miller

may be of interest to others in conjunction with his review of my book, which can be found

here


http://www.cogsci.ecs.soton.ac.uk/cgi/psyc/newpsy?article=7.12&submit=View+Article



nI met Dr Miller at a prestigious conference on the biological basis of sexual behavior that was first held in 1995,

soon after the release of my book. He is a economics professor in New Orleans, and I was surprised to learn this,

because the conference was clearly intended to bring together the top behavioral development specialists, with

emphasis on biology. After speaking with him briefly, I learned that he was well read on many topics--which is

typical of many people in Mensa. After the conference, I looked for his name and found him on the Mensa membership

list. We corresponded for several years, and I ran into him at another conference or two. Still, I don't believe

that he ever grasped the biological basis of my presentations on human pheromones, and I found him particularly

unwilling to discuss anything about biology. This sort of stubborness is also characteristic of many people in

Mensa.

The purpose of this post is mostly to say "I told you so" to Dr. Miller, and anyone else who does not

accept the biological facts about pheromones, and intead chooses to take a psychological approach--especially an

evolutionary-type approach to the topic. The difference is biological fact versus psychological story telling--as I

hope others will realize if they read Dr. Miller's review of my book. The biological facts have stood the test of

time. Dr. Miller's review/story is simply one of many "just so" stories. For example, his take on concealed

ovulation was wrong. Men do detect and prefer the scent of an ovulatory woman, which effectively eliminates one of

evolutionary psychology's basic tenents--that our lack of olfactory acuity and specificity is what led us to become

more visual creatures. Instead, our behavior is as biologically based in pheromones as the behavior of any other

mammal on the planet.

JVK