My Email To Intimate Research

[voodoo]

With all this talk about IR lately I thought I would email them and get some info about their products. I was going to buy through IR before finding this site so I thought \"why not\"

They told me their \"to attract women\" products all contain
-nol. I replied to them stating that many feel, myself included, that -nol is better suited to attract women and that -none is the male phero. They said I was misinformed and their products have been proven to attract women for over 10 years.

On top of that they said that their research and countless other shows that -nol definately is the male phero.

So is this true? If -nol is the actual male phero where did
-none come from and why do we bother with it?

I have used -none adn had no luck what so ever, perhaps this is the reason...Can any one clarify all this? Thanks.

[**DONOTDELETE**]

hey, nol is a unisex phero it appears, but what the hell, IR colognes do work, thats for sure, so i guess they know what they are talking about...

[**DONOTDELETE**]

i went on the website and they have a ton of products on there...has anyone had any positive experiences, well not just positive but amazing results with any of the products? i just got cool scent

[krtel]

I\'ve read a college study of pheromones, not sure which one anymore, but they said none was a pig pheromone. Weird stuff.

- Krish

[druid]

well I guess that doesn\'t help the \"men are pigs\" rumor does it?

[krtel]

Nope, not at all. LOL.

- Krish

[Watcher]

Folks we have alot of the different interest groups here (phil stone - stone labs products all use rone nol none and androstadinenone *a1*. All have different effects.
Nol - giggle response
None - the hard sexual phero
Rone - signals hetro level and musculinity.

We have covered all this before different phero science types are on this board 1600+ users contributing and even james v kohl who is another leading researcher.

[CptKipling]

Both none and nol are unisex, BTW

[**DONOTDELETE**]

It\'s hard to know who or what to believe when it comes to phero\'s. I\'ve been using phero\'s off, and on, for the last 2 years or so. One site will tell you that, alcohol kills phero\'s, while another will tell you it doesn\'t matter, others will tell you that phero\'s have a smell, while another site will tell you that phero\'s shouldn\'t smell at all. I can go on and on, with all the differences from one site to the next, about phero\'s. I guess you have to go with the sites that you believe.

[**DONOTDELETE**]

I would like to know people\'s success with IR stuff
like dark continent or SPC
what can a youngin like me use? i just got cool scent, and i might add some NPA to that.

[Watcher]

What are youre thoughts on love-scents site BNQ. Do we present valid information. Bruce isnt tied to any particular brand here, he is a reseller with some exclusive products so he is at least the most unbiased around.
Its pretty much open phero info around here.

[druid]

captain - hey when u say that nol and none are unisex, do u mean that nol and none will ellict the same response in the oppsite sex when a man or woman wears it? or do u mean that it can be worn both men and women, but they will ellicit a response approiate for the sex who is wearning it? if they are unisex then I would think they would not be approiate for a hetero guy because then woman would view him as \"unisex\" and would\'t that be bad? therefore I would think that something with rone in it would be appropiate...

[**DONOTDELETE**]

What I was saying is, that every site has a different opinion or marketing strategy when it comes mones. It leaves the end user confused on what the real deal is. The only thing I\'m saying is, you have to go with the people that you believe and trust. I\'ve read many articles from experts in the field, and their opinions differ greatly from one to the other. It all goes with what and who you believe. The first product I bought was beaches, the crap did nothing. I got the link to this site from one of the members of the beaches bullitin board. The first product I bought from Bruce was Primal, that was over 2 years ago. I\'m still buying products from here today. I think Love-Scent is a great site, and this BB, and the customer service here is second to none. /ubbthreads/images/icons/smile.gif

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Yes, no question about it.

I think the \"unisex\" pheromones are more geared toward making people of either sex feel chatty and mildly aroused, in some nonspecific way - it\'s been described both as fear and sexual arousal, so it\'s hard to tell, exactly. With the combination of wanting to talk and being somehow aroused, one should be able then to manipulate the situation to some extent. This is my understanding from what I\'ve read so far and it may be off-base, someone will surely correct me if so (please). It appears that -rone is the pheromone that is most signature \"male.\" And who can wear what to attract whom ... there are so many variables that it\'s hard to say. Experimentation is the key. But when you find that key, it sure does open up Nirvana. /ubbthreads/images/icons/smile.gif

[Irish]

I am afraid it will be decades before we really understand what the human pheros and their combinations do. Right now we know so little, and the experimenters on this forum probably know as much as anyone.

I think it may be off base to categorize each of these chemicals with a particular characteristic - like the \'alpha\' phero or the \'submission\' phero. We have noticed some generalities about each of them, but we also know they don\'t always \'work\' that way in every situation. It\'s sensible to try to understand these chemicals according to individual \'function\', but there\'s also some reasons why that may be too simple an approach.

Martha McClintock has maintained that in mammals a few phero chemicals combine in various combinations to send different signals. In other words the component pattern of the phero brew is the message, and that way many messages can be sent with just a few chemicals. She warns against looking too much at each chemical in isolation for effects. We are experimenting with just a few of the chemicals our bodies produce - smearing on synthetic megadoses of a few of them, and washing off our own pheros with hygiene practices. While we are certainly observing certain types of effects this way, I think it\'s an oversimplification to tag each chemical with a social label and think we have the whole picture.

Another issue is the amount of synthetic phero we apply (in my previous posts and others see how in some cases we are applying hundreds of times what our entire body would produce, with just one spray). To quote Noam Sobel\'s brilliant paper on human phero brain activation: \"The language of the chemical senses in general, and pheromones in particular, is unknown, and an increase in pheromone concentration may confer a different message rather than an increase in the intensity of the same message\". By applying relative megadoses we may actually be sending the \'reverse\' of a message that would be sent in lower concentration! Couple that with the fact that that we shower away our own natural pheros, and the picture is confusing at best.

I\'m certainly not against trying these chemicals out and watching for effects. But I\'m afraid our attempts to classify each synthetic we are using as a single-effect chemical will not provide the real answers.

[Whitehall]

Irish makes a good point that our responses to the various pheromones are complex. As an illustrative analogue, think of the different pheromones as the alphabet and the intensity of each as capitalization, italics, etc.

a = none
b = rone
c = nol
d = A-1
e = cops

Then make combinations:

CAT

Ate

ABc

Abc

Dab

Bed

and so forth and so on.

So the rone testing is B or b.

[Irish]

Yep. And that\'s mentioning just the phero\'s we have commercially available. The combinational palatte of mixture possibilities is staggering. Deciphering the meaning of human phero messages is a work that will go on a long time.

That\'s not to say there couldn\'t be primary effects associated with each chemical, but I think McClintock is correct to warn that we shouldn\'t assume humans are simpler than all the other mammals, not without a little evidence.

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Is anyone making further study on copulins, do you know?

[Whitehall]

I do aesthetic field research on in vivo copulins every chance I get.

Volunteers welcome.

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Dog! I just bet you do...

[Gerund]

----------------------------------------------------------
he is at least the most unbiased around.
----------------------------------------------------------

Watcher, you fried my logic circuits with that phrasing! /ubbthreads/images/icons/wink.gif I\'m just teasing; I haven\'t razzed you for a while.

So, if Bruce is at least the most unbiased around, would that make him singularly unique? hehe /ubbthreads/images/icons/smile.gif

[voodoo]

Sorry guys I didn\'t mean to confuse the idea ...My post wasn\'t meant to ask which pheros do what...It was meant to ask if -none is the actual natural male phero or if -nol was.

This shouldn\'t be hard to prove at all...I am assuming someone in the field knows where these pheros come from and which are derived from humans, males in particular.

[**DONOTDELETE**]

The answer is both, and more. Humans (and other animals) produce a large number of pheromones, among which are nol and none. There is no single \'male phero\' . If there were, there would be very little to discuss here. Men (and women) produce both nol and none in varying amounts, as well as lots of other things that haven\'t been fully researched yet.