'mones - smoke and mirrors or ?

[ratspeaker]

Do

they work ? Will they get U laid ? Are they smoke and mirrors ? I have over the years tried many products - some

smell good - some smell like yak dung ! Do they work ? Hmn.....

Not like people hope !

Evidence based science,

the new buzzword, but, we have a problem what is evidence ..? We can never experience the same situation with and

without 'mones, so we can never judge the difference. Add in the anticipation (ooh I want this to work) effect and

hey was that a "hit" or was that me observing peoples reactions to me for change?

Does this stuff have an effect?

Sometimes, I think it does - but not in the way I want from a pheromone! Let me clarify. In intimate situations I

have had women sniff and turn to animals... But, and its a big but .. "In intimate situations"; ie I'm already home

and dry. As for attracting women....

No, If you use enough of this stuff to effect a change at distance, when

they get close you come across smellin like the mummies curse! It won't change people who don't like you into

people who do. And as for 'none well ..99 outa 100 women will hate you for wearing it and that aint cos you make

them horny.

nol makes them "chatty" for 20 mins after u slap it on.. then u get a headache and they get ratty.

SOE, nice smell will have them talking your ears off -- if they are sensitive to it -- not all women

are!

Pherofragrance - well Dr Dodd gets it right again - nice for empathy, again won't get you laid but in an

intimate situation it may well enhance enjoyment.

A1 -- good for PMT :rofl:

NPA - Ug - essence of tramp -

maybe it removes paint, I can't afford the cover scent - you need a strong one and primal is far better, something

to do with the oil and anyway 99 out of 100 women .......

the rest - well ... is it all in your mind or isn't it

..............................


discuss.............

Love and Peace and a merry xmas

[bronzie]

interesting post ratspeaker, you

know alot about .mones for a newbie in the forum...

im trying to read between the lines....

im with

you on dr dodd, good product, but not a silver bullet

A1? pms?.... i never even knew that was one of it's

supposed effects

[ratspeaker]

Some may remember me......



Try the A1 on a PMT riddled subject .... you will be amazed!!

see original Erox research for confirmation of

'dienone effects...

[jvkohl]

Evidence based

science, the new buzzword, but, we have a problem what is evidence ..?

The problem is more likely to

be what evidence is accepted, not merely what is evidence. For example, the Scientific Evidence page of my domain

contains references to published works that are considered "evidence" among most researchers. Because it's

difficult to understand the "jargon" in the abstracts, I've included either quotes or my interpretation of "key

issues" or "key findings." But, unless someone scans this evidence, they might think that the only evidence is that

provided on this Forum, and by other less-than-scientific representations. This is one reason I post to the

"Pheromone Research" section of the Forum. By posting there, I try to provide links to scientific evidence for those

who don't want to look through the pages of scientific evidence at my domain.

This calls to question--in my

mind, at least -- how much scientific weight people give to published research findings, compared to product

marketing claims. Seems to me that the science and marketing claims should somehow manage a good "fit," and if there

is no fit between the science and the marketing claims, than something has gone horribly wrong. Is this "wrong" more

likely to happen with science, or with marketing claims?

JVK

[ratspeaker]

hmn.......

But the science

and the marketing don't "fit". The marketing suggests that dripping these products upon oneself will attract women

like moths to a flame. The science fails to grasp the emotive nature of the subject and tries to test in a cold,

clinical, abstract, scientific way that is unrelated to the real world; and anyways science seems confused as to

what it is it is actually trying to quantify.

My experience tells me that any effect from these substances is

mild and works best on suceptible women in an intimate situation when mind is not fighting the subjects more primal

urges. This is a subjective judgement since I can never know if the situation would be different if I hadn't

applied a product.

[Spiderweb]

wow, thats quite an

analysis...all i can say is i had a social event tonight with work and applied a spray of The Edge under my t

shirt...and got some of the new Jovan Heat for men...so i covered it with that...

had a hot blonde approach me

and say "dang, you smell good..i love the scent of that ..what are you wearing"...haha..she reached up and touched

my arm as she talked to me..i was like..."damn"...so i proceeded to tell her the story of how i had gotten the

cologne for christmas from an office co worker party.yada yada yada...she couldnt take her eyes off me..

then,

there was this 19 year old intern who kept looking at me but seemed very shy...so towards the end of the event, we

sorta positioned ourselves within talking distance and started talking..the eye contact was long and furious, she

wouldnt stop talking and had this big ass smile on her face..her boss literally couldnt pull her away from me at the

end of the thing...she had one of those asses that make you wish you had been reincarnated as a pair of her tight

ass jeans...

so, to sum it up...thanks Edge for a very cat pissy, stinky and very profitable evening!:)

ps...also applied a role of SOE...so it was teh edge and soe...didnt want to forget that part!

[CptKipling]

ratspeaker I think I remember

you...

I agree that there is a unfortunate disparity between MOST pheromone product marketing and the science

(and the results in a lot of cases). But to me that is more a consequence of opportunistic companies taking

advantage of the "gimme a pill for it" culture we live in, rather than the lack of genuine selling points.

I

think this actually results in giving some consumers far less credit than they deserve. It really is unfortunate

that there is a lot of money to be made from a certain demographic of guy reading, "THIS WILL GET YOU

LAID."

[jvkohl]

hmn.......
But

the science and the marketing don't "fit". The marketing suggests that dripping these products upon oneself will

attract women like moths to a flame.

Whose marketing? The only "moth to a flame" marketing that

I've seen is decidely not based on science. In every case, they cite vague references or media representations to

otherwise obscure the fact that there is no human product that elicits an aphrodisiac effect (and no functional

human VNO). No guarenteed to get laid; nothing. Enhancement of your own natural scent signature is all that you can

gain. To you, that is evident. Others have bought into the marketing.



The science

fails to grasp the emotive nature of the subject and tries to test in a cold, clinical, abstract, scientific way

that is unrelated to the real world; and anyways science seems confused as to what it is it is actually trying to

quantify.

Science is trying to quantify unconscious affect that is elicited by effects of pheromones

on hormones (which have been clearly demonstrated). In order to quantify unconscious affect, the "cold, clinical,

abstract, scientific way that is unrelated to the real world" must be used. Otherwise, you end up falling short of a

controlled study, and other scientists don't care what you find. If you're just going to take someone's word for

what they demonstrated, something is wrong with your approach (since marketers will tell you whatever they think you

want to hear). But if you look at even a small portion of the research, you begin to learn the difference between

the marketing and the science of human pheromones.



My experience tells me that any

effect from these substances is mild and works best on suceptible women in an intimate situation when mind is not

fighting the subjects more primal urges. This is a subjective judgement since I can never know if the situation

would be different if I hadn't applied a product.

Mild = enhancement; suceptible = ovulatory phase;

intimate = proximity; unconscious affect = mind not fighting primal urges.

Thus, your experience and

subjective judgement are as good, and probably better, than that of others. Collectively, however, what we continue

to see on this Forum is that some products seem to mildly enhance the potential for successful interaction (perhaps

including sexual opportunity). So, if you look into the scientific support for this enhancement, and can't find it

-- there's a problem; especially if you can't find it in my writings: book; journal articles; reviews--whatever.

And, if you look into scientific support for anything more than enhancement--the problem becomes clear: there isn't

any. That means that the marketers have sucessfully scammed you, and that they are sucessful marketers.

To

my knowledge: Love-Scent has never made any wild claims. For example: "Try this" is not a wild claim. People who use

Love-Scent products--and probably some of the Love-Scent affiliates -- have made some interesting claims that

correlate well with some of the science, but there are also people on this Forum, and some affiliates that focus on

marketing interests, and their claims do not correlate well with any of the science.

You seem to have a good

handle on all of this, and I look forward to hearing more from you.

JVK

[ratspeaker]

I have nothing against this

site - it's better than the others in the respect that Bruce supplies the products he claims and seems to have

genuine interest. I find a lot of what goes on on this forum in terms of talking up some of the products, worrying.

As I said, wanting it to work causes people to analyse their social interactions much more than they normally

would. Also, the concept of products that don't work in isolation may work if mixed with other products to be an

unscientific methodology for achieving the effect the subscribers to this forum desire.

As for the science, well,

a lot of supposed scientists claim a lot of things. Another lot of supposed scientists disagree with them. There

is no one authority on this subject and in my opinion it doesn't seem very well researched; at least publicly.

Even the existence of the VNO is disputed and counter disputed. Your product (SOE) and that of Dr Dodd

(pherofragrence) in my opinion represent the best of the bunch. They enhance communicativeness in people in a

fairly reliable way, but they are not aphrodisiacs. I am very distrustful of -none. It has effects, but mainly

undesirable. I'm sure many married phero users have experience -none enhanced PMT syndrome! Many rant about its

effectiveness, but the subjective nature of attraction and many variables other than scent that are involved, make

it very hard to measure the true effectiveness of any of these products; on both the wearer and the intended target.

As for scientific method , well, a lab is a bit of a clinical setting to measure an emotive thing like sexual

attraction. This is a case where the scientific method affects the experiment to such a degree as to render the

results suspect. Yes, you can see hormonal changes with some putative pheros - but what is the effect on the

organism of that change and does it affect conciousness in the way we seek.


By now I would have considered that

the apocrine secretions of sexually aroused human subjects would have been well and truly analysed and the various

components documented and the various compounds tested for effectiveness. Yet still we have no 'phero' that is

compounded to mimic these secretions. Now, -none, nol etc are not found in isolation in apocrine secretions. A

mix is always present and the synergy of the different components is usually responsible for the quality of the

effect. A part understood theory that seems to be the empirical basis of the furtive mixing of love scent

aficionados. Love scent haven't found the perfect phero, the scientists haven't and neither have the fragrance

companies . As for aphrodisiacs not existing - Bremelanotide - looks a likely candidate, but hey - it

aint secreted by humans and thus it aint a phero.

Now I view all this as a part of the science of

perfumery. Musks have been used for centuries to add a sensual edge to scents and these ' putative phero'

compounds can be considered as artificial musks. Thus, the way forward for phero aficionados would be the more

scientific approach of a chemistry set of 'musk's' and the quality essential oils of perfumery... i.e. become

scent designers! Not desparate people mixing ready made products together in the hope of creating a new wonder

solution that will have the ladies drooling.



Discuss and enjoy



Merry xmas and a happy new year to you

all...............

[Gegogi]

I find a lot of what goes

on on this forum in terms of talking up some of the products, worrying.

The same may be said of any

topic or life in general. Nobody has claimmed our casual observations in this forum are anything but anecdotal in

nature. If everything in life needed to be confirmed by rigorous scientific analysis conversations would be rather

stiff and brief.

[belgareth]

I'm not sure what you are

looking for here. If it is the putative perfect pheromone combination,

forget it. The individualistic nature of the human animal makes that unlikely. And even if you found one that seemed

to work for a majority of subjects in a given test group that would only apply to that test group. The same applies

to personal style in almost any endeavor. For instance, as a manager I am very hands off and allow people lots of

space to accomplish their tasks. People have quit because they felt too insecure without more direct supervision. In

the world off attraction I appeal to a percentage of the women I meet on a consistant basis without any pheromones

and apparently to a larger group or more intensely to the original group with pheromones. but I will never appeal to

all women no more than I'll ever be able to be friends with all people or able to lead every group. Humans are too

unique as individuals. Another example would be cooking. We've been cooking food for close to a half million years

now and still nobody can agree on the best taste for any two foods. That's because each of us have our own taste,

developed and inherent dislikes and likes.

In my opinion, perfumery is a related but seperate area of knowledge.

Scents are meant to produce a certain smell in a person at the conscious where pheromones are intended to effect at

the subconcious level. Perfumery and pheromones can compliment one another but are seperate areas of learning.



Your scepticism is welcome. I would rather see somebody approach the field with a lot of doubts than somebody

coming in claiming (unlikely) miracles. Perhaps your experience will contribute more to our empirical knowledge just

because you are a sceptic.

[ratspeaker]

well ... sceptic .. maybe.

I feel the point is missed. As a sceptic I could ask are these products value for money? As a scientist I could

ask do these products have a discernable, repeatable, measurable effect? To question is healthy - these are not

cheap toys. You all seem to be seeking a similar goal - social enhancement; but, the points are: are you going

about this in the right way? Are you getting what you want from the products? Are you all honest about the effects

you think you get or are you wise enough to ask the question - is this effect caused by the mones? Is the effect of

pheros ameniable to "the scientific method" anyway?

I agree that we are individuals, with individual tastes and

prejudices. Our behaviour is far too complex to reduce to the level of animal instinct that is required for

pheromonal action to be significant. What about visual cues, looking nice. Aural cues..sounding nice. Smell and

pheromonal signalling are only a part of the package. If you just buy products and mix them together in a haphazard

manner you get poor and unsatisfied and waste resource foolishly.

I use phero's myself to enhance my perfume -

my smell - which is an expression of my style. As a perfumery ingredient they enhance the whole package. Slapped

on in vain hope they stink like a tomcats hindmost portions and are a waste of money.

[belgareth]

well ...

sceptic .. maybe. I feel the point is missed. As a sceptic I could ask are these products value for money? As a

scientist I could ask do these products have a discernable, repeatable, measurable effect? To question is healthy -

these are not cheap toys. You all seem to be seeking a similar goal - social enhancement; but, the points are: are

you going about this in the right way? Are you getting what you want from the products? Are you all honest about the

effects you think you get or are you wise enough to ask the question - is this effect caused by the mones? Is the

effect of pheros ameniable to "the scientific method" anyway?

As another scientist, no the methods here

are not very scientific. I tried hard to eliminate every variable I could during the first period of testing and

kept good records. While still subjective I managed to convince myself that they were working to some degree. In my

own case, due to the nature of the business I own, I was able to recreate situations multiple times over a period of

time.

In my own case, enhancing business relations was the sole purpose of starting with pheromones. There have

been other benefits along the way but I'd say that I have recieved far more benefit than the capital I have

invested in pheromones...and had a lot of fun playing with them while I was at it.


I agree that

we are individuals, with individual tastes and prejudices. Our behaviour is far too complex to reduce to the level

of animal instinct that is required for pheromonal action to be significant. What about visual cues, looking nice.

Aural cues..sounding nice. Smell and pheromonal signalling are only a part of the package. If you just buy products

and mix them together in a haphazard manner you get poor and unsatisfied and waste resource

foolishly.

Many of us have talked time and again about our belief that pheromones are only a small part

of the whole attraction picture. There are many facets that have to be accounted for in attracting somebody. Gegogi

is fond of saying that if you pour mones on a corpse the women are not going to hump it raw. Another poster, maybe

Koolking, wrote an excellent post a while back about enhancing your attraction that covered a wide range of topics.

Many of us do understand that the fat couch potato who is missing two front teeth and needs a shower is not going to

be helped by pheromones, that you have to work on all areas together to form a complete and coherent

image.


I use phero's myself to enhance my perfume - my smell - which is an expression of my

style. As a perfumery ingredient they enhance the whole package. Slapped on in vain hope they stink like a tomcats

hindmost portions and are a waste of money. :rofl: Ain't that the truth?