Selling pheromone perfumes

[jvkohl]

Someone asked

why I keep focussing on research that disproves the human VNO approach. Here's a relatively plain answer in the

recent article at this

URL:

http://www.inklingmagazine.com/articles/the-importance-of-smelling-daddy/

["pheromone

theories in humans no doubt receive harsh criticism," Matchock admits. However well accepted in other mammals, the

notion of chemical sexual signals is often mocked in humans. "Charlatans selling pheromone perfumes as attraction

potions and the like discredited it," he deplores.]

See:
Matchock RL, Susman EJ. Family composition and

menarcheal age: Anti-inbreeding strategies. Am J Hum Biol. 2006 Jul-Aug;18(4):481-91. "...a putative pheromone

receptor gene was recently found in human olfactory mucosa near the primary olfactory bulb..., implying that the

VNO... may not be a prerequisite for pheromone detection.

JVK

[ratspeaker]

"Charlatans selling pheromone

perfumes as attraction potions and the like discredited it"

I heartily agree - commercial interests are stifling

research (trade secrets) and discrediting the subject.

[jvkohl]

"Charlatans

selling pheromone perfumes as attraction potions and the like discredited it"

I heartily agree - commercial

interests are stifling research (trade secrets) and discrediting the subject.

I received many

positive comments when "The Aprhodisiac Test" aired in the UK (featuring SoE products as one of several

"aphrodisiacs"). Overall, I kept getting the message that no one had ever before heard anything about human

pheromones in a believable format. Those that knew anything about them had only heard the "guaranteed to get you

laid" marketing claims. After a realistic approach, there was much more interest--as evidenced by hits to

that transferred to Love-scent.com.

When I see posts that are likely to do more

to discredit the subject than evoke interest, I become concerned. But, as others have noted, it's not all about the

science--and at least the General Discussion Forum doesn't get too many of the discrediting claims. Research

proceeds, albeit at a slower pace than it might have without the rididculous marketing claims. But I think that the

scientific approach will someday prevail, since there is no reason not to incorporate "real" science into the

approach.

JVK