The range of VNO

[Golden_Gecko]

1-I was reading an

article on the Kohl\'s website. It says that VNO operates differently than the nose. However the real function and

more importantly THE RANGE of the VNO is not elaborated. Does anybody know the range of the VNO?

2-I am confused

because in the article it says VNO is not responsible for gathering scents, whereas in the forum I read phrases like

\"..the -none smells like..\". If only VNO gathers the pheros, then how can one smell it?

[Pancho1188]

</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
1-I was reading an article on the Kohl\'s

website. It says that VNO operates differently than the nose. However the real function and more importantly THE

RANGE of the VNO is not elaborated. Does anybody know the range of the VNO?

2-I am confused because in the

article it says VNO is not responsible for gathering scents, whereas in the forum I read phrases like \"..the -none

smells like..\". If only VNO gathers the pheros, then how can one smell it?

<hr /></blockquote><font

class=\"post\">

1. I don\'t know. I\'ve heard you have to be close (A few feet), but many have mentioned

reactions from up to 20 feet. 2-20 feet is a good start...try narrowing/tweaking it from there.

2. I think what

they mean is that the VNO is what detects the pheros and triggers the hormonal response to it...your nose still

smells the phero\'s scent (e.g. \"cat piss\"), though, it\'s just not responsible for recognizing the scent as

pheromones and causing the chemical reaction that the VNO (supposedly) does.

[CptKipling]

</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
1-I was reading an article on the Kohl\'s

website. It says that VNO operates differently than the nose. However the real function and more importantly THE

RANGE of the VNO is not elaborated. Does anybody know the range of the VNO?

2-I am confused because in the

article it says VNO is not responsible for gathering scents, whereas in the forum I read phrases like \"..the -none

smells like..\". If only VNO gathers the pheros, then how can one smell it?

<hr /></blockquote><font

class=\"post\">

1 - The real function of the VNO? It is theorised that the VNO is stimulated by some or all

pheromones, therefore it\'s function is to sense them. I don\'t think anyone really knows the range of the VNO,

but 10\' is a pretty good estimate (depending on temp., wind conditions and if you are inside or not). You will

certainly see stronger reactions if you get closer.

2 - What Pancho said, pheromones stimulate our regular

olfactory receptors aswell. This secondary pheromone sense may have an impact on us aswell.

[Teak]

I thought Kohl had a

theory that the VNO might not be the main channel that pheromones effect in humans. Something about eliciting a

hormonal response?

But range of pheromone effectiveness also brings up the question, if not in a 1-on-1

situation, can humans subconsciously distinguish where they are coming from and associate the response to that

person? The concern being if say in a group of people, they elicit a general response, but other factors then

contribute to who is associated with it. Maybe someone else who they are already interested in or find attractive.

Maybe the person they are sitting next to or talking to, etc.

[Irish]

There\'s some

controversy about the human adult function of the VNO, if it has one at all. EROX scientists have built a company on

the idea that the VNO can be the conduit for medical treatment. Others dispute that, pointing out no apparent direct

nerve connection from the human VNO to the brain. Personally, I think the human VNO\'s there for a reason, and

some research indicates the possibility of an electrochemical VNO-brain connection, not necessarily by direct

enervation.

In any case, something in the nasal area signals the human brain when exposed to certain pheros

- the brain scans prove that. Whether the channel is through the VNO or main olfactory system probably doesn\'t

matter too much to us phero users. Even some animals that have proven VNO function also process some pheros through

the main scent system. I guess the important thing is that the pheros do affect our human brains.

It\'s

reasonable that a phero could affect the VNO and still have a noticeable smell through the main system. No reason

for it to process only through one system or the other. In fact in mice the main system can be \'trained\' to

respond to pheros after a successful exposure through the VNO system. Scientists have spent a good deal of time

understanding the functions of the VNO and main system of rodents. Just starting to study humans…

As far as

range, Miller has argued that for humans the olfactory signals are only effective at close range. Sight is our

long-range sense and can pick out individual attributes at a distance much better than a general scent wafting in

the wind. Sight is reliable at a distance when smell would not be (windy condition, confusion of scents from a group

of people, etc. )Miller therefore argues that human phero action is designed for close-range bonding and not for

long-distance signaling. He thinks that human pheros are designed to strengthen the pair bond between couples.

McClintock\'s finding that dienone (generated in the male armpit) improves women\'s mood, and might only do so

when a male is present, seems to fall in line with Miller\'s theory.

That\'s a lot of conjecture, but it

is a nice working theory - I don\'t think anyone has specifically tested the range (which I suppose would

translate into airborne concentration) for VNO response. EROX scientists pump pheros through a tube directly on the

VNO to test for response - I don\'t know if anyone else is directly testing the VNO.

[oscar]

GG,

I would

cautiously submit that the VNO has NO \"range\" whatsoever. Molecules have got to make their way to IT, the same

way that scent molecules have to find their way to your olfactory receptors.

The more appropriate question would

then be, \"What is the effective range of pheromones from their source?\"
And that one has been debated numerous

times.
Do an \"All Forums\", \"All Posts\" search for \"range\".

Oscar

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Skyy]

I know FTR could smell

-none and quite a bit of other users can as well. The majority of users can\'t pick up its scent. I think it was

1 out of 4 can smell it? *shrug*

[bjf]

Skyy:

I thought it

was 1 out of 4 that can\'t smell it...*shrug*

BJF

[Bruce]

1 out of 4 can NOT

smell androsteNONE.

Some pheromones stimulate the VNO and some do not. The Erox guys make a big point that

-dienone is the only pheromone that stimulates the VNO sufficiently to do anything and therefore it is the only

*real* human pheromone. They are the ones responsible for referring to aNONE as a \"pig pheromone\", but research

has shown that aNONE doesn\'t use the pig\'s VNO to work its magic either. The effects of aNONE on pig mating

behavior is unmistakable, but when the pig\'s VNO is surgically destroyed the dramatic reaction to ANON is the

same. So, hey, it looks to me like aNONE works through the normal olfactory sensors and dienone works thru the VNO.

No simple answers here, I\'d say.

B

[Skyy]

yay i was wrong!!

:P

hehe well i sorta was on the right track :P

[bjf]

So, hey, it looks to me

like aNONE works through the normal olfactory sensors &gt;&gt;&gt;

I thought even those 1 out of 4 that cannot

smell anone, it still has an affect on as a pheromone. IE, if you put a boatload of PI on a male who cannot smell

it, he will still get in a pissed off, aggresive mood.


Am I wrong about this?

[Bruce]

Well, there are a

number of explanations. One is that aNONE works thru both (or either) route, and another is that it works thru

normal olfaction but the 1 out of 4 guys, just don\'t get a conscious signal for some reason.

B

[Golden_Gecko]

</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
The Erox guys make a big point that -dienone is the

only pheromone that stimulates the VNO sufficiently to do anything and therefore it is the only *real* human

pheromone.

<hr /></blockquote><font class=\"post\">

Forgive me for my newbiness, but does that mean:
1-

none, nol, rone do not stimulate VNO but affect behavior in some other way?
2- none, nol, rone stimulate VNO, but

not sufficiently?
3- There is (are) other organ(s) that is responsible for eliciting phermone behavior (attraction,

social hits, openness eetc..) other than VNO?

I am a bit confused here, can pheros create a reaction directly

through the olfactory system (without VNO)? If not, then how come are we getting hits without -dienone?

[CptKipling]

</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
</font><blockquote><font

class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
The Erox guys make a big point that -dienone is the only pheromone that

stimulates the VNO sufficiently to do anything and therefore it is the only *real* human pheromone.

<hr

/></blockquote><font class=\"post\">

Forgive me for my newbiness, but does that mean:
1- none, nol, rone do

not stimulate VNO but affect behavior in some other way?
2- none, nol, rone stimulate VNO, but not

sufficiently?
3- There is (are) other organ(s) that is responsible for eliciting phermone behavior (attraction,

social hits, openness eetc..) other than VNO?

I am a bit confused here, can pheros create a reaction directly

through the olfactory system (without VNO)? If not, then how come are we getting hits without -dienone?


<hr

/></blockquote><font class=\"post\">

Bear in mind that we don\'t completely trust the Erox guys.

We are

saying that pheros other than A1 may not stimulate the VNO enough to induce a reaction through that pathway,

but our main olfaction receptors can detect the other pheros causing a reaction to happen that way.

[oscar]

I\'m going to shamelessly trot

out an old theory of mine here. Not totally shamelessly actually, since I have corrected a few spelling errors. I

also figured I\'d leave in the DIHL theory as it was part of the original

post.
_______________________________


VNO/Olfactory Crossover and DIHL Theories.

Like many of you I\'ve

read a good deal on Pheromones and the Vomeronasal Organ. Certainly not everything, but then I doubt anyone has.

While I have no credentials that entitle me to present hypotheses, I do have this forum where I can do so

nonetheless. Much of what I\'m about to present is conjecture, some is based on reading I\'ve done on theories

that may have been subsequently proven or even disproven. Some is stolen direcly from you, my fellow forum members.

I tender thanks and apologies where applicable.

To begin, I offer a little story which, while NOT related

directly to Pheromones, will hopefully illustrate the incredible powers of adaptivity of the human brain.

A

pregnant woman has a craving for lox. The dutiful father-to-be finds an all-night deli, and heroically returns home

with the object of his wifes desires, and all is well.
On the next routine visit to the obstetrician, insightful

Ob/Gyn Doc asks mom-to-be if she\'s had any cravings. She relates the lox saga. The doctor states that he\'ll

prescribe a potassium supplement, as that\'s a nutrient often depleted during pregnancy, and the craving for lox

was likely the body\'s way of conveying this message. Lox is evidently loaded with potassium.

If you try to

figure out what happened here, you cannot help but come away with an incredible degree of respect for the power of

the human brain.
First, a message of need was transmitted. From where? A particular organ in the woman\'s body?

An organ in the fetus? The brain of the fetus? I don\'t know.
Next that message was received and translated into

a practical solution by the brain, and a remedy was \"prescribed\".
The pregnant woman had no clue that lox

contained potassium, or that she even needed potassium, but her brain put the signal into terms that became

workable. Her brain somehow knew that lox was a familiar means of acquiring the necessary nutrient, and thus created

the craving.
If she had been a primitive living in the rainforest, she might have been more likely to send her

husband out for bananas, but perhaps in this case the mom\'s brain realized there were no all-night produce stands

nearby.

VNO / Olfactory Crossover

We see a great deal of conflicting information regarding the existence

and/or functionality of the human Vomeronasal Organ. I\'m willing to believe that we all have a fully functional

VNO, but I also wish to present a theory that would allow for the effectiveness of Pheromones even if our VNO\'s

were non-functional.

What if our VNO\'s HAD begun to become mere vestigial organs at some point in our

evolutionary past? Wouldn\'t our brains with their incredible powers of adaptability have found some way of

creating a back-up system, a redundancy to provide the ability to utilize this feature in some way should it be

required at some point in the future?

I would suggest that just the smell of Pheromones will provide the

activation of the Hypothalamus that the VNO is reputed to have an exclusive lock on. That is to say that there\'s

a programmed response to Pheromones triggered by our olfactory sense and cross-wired to the hypothalamus, by-passing

the VNO altogether. The programming being NOT a conditioned response but rather an input of information from one

piece of biological hardware to another by a means that is different from the original configuration.

They have a

motto at the Disney company, \"If you can dream it, you can do it.\" I\'ll propose that our brains work on a

similar premise. We cannot begin to imagine the capabilities within our heads. Or maybe we CAN.

I cannot concede

that in the process of our allegedly losing the use of our VNO for the purpose for which it was intended, that our

brains didn\'t create (or ALREADY have in place) a back-up system.

This could account for the results seen in

the experiments where it was supposedly found that Androstenone and Androstenol don\'t activate the VNO. They may

only trigger Hypothalmic response when received by olfactory sensors. So, I\'ll ask the question before truth can,

\"So what about the positive effect of Androstadienone on the VNO?\". Maybe that\'s the only embodiement of

androgens that our devolved VNO\'s CAN detect. I really don\'t know. I\'d like to, but I don\'t.



DIHL

We all daydream. We\'ve seen people daydreaming. It looks to the observer that the daydreamer is

\"somewhere else\" mentally. Perhaps the daydreamer is in some \"place\" deep within the mind.

The state of

daydreaming and the effect we call the \"Deer in the Headlights Look\" are probably quite similar, though they

likely don\'t occur in the same \"place\".

The Hypothalamus is a primitive part of our brains that we no

longer rely upon to the extent that our early ancestors did. While we know that it still regulates body temperature

and other necessary functions, it\'s rarely called upon to make a \"Fight or Flight\"* decision, and the role of

Pheromone input has surely diminished over the millenia.
But when it IS called upon, it works damn well.
*I\'ve

long wondered, if we were suddenly exposed to the scent of a Sabre-toothed Tiger while we were sleeping, if we\'d

suddely bolt upright and go crashing through the nearest window to escape. (Haven\'t lost any sleep over this

though.)

When I\'ve been fortunate enough to see what I\'d refer to as a \"Textbook DIHL\", what I\'ve

observed is a woman going to another place, somewhere DEEP within herself, totally negating the effect of the

conscious mind.

I would liken it to driving on a mountainous country road while listening to the radio. Suddenly,

instead of Creed or Bush, you\'re listening to a Bluegrass station, and it doesn\'t go away until you\'ve

crested the next hill, unless you can actively tune your own station back in.

That\'s where females who are

truly in DIHL mode are, somewhere in the deep primitive recesses of their minds, awaiting a signal to bring them

back.
Something like a transmission slipping.

The little Hypothalamus has taken over control of the ship, and

the more developed parts of her brain need to muster their forces to put down the mutiny. How long this takes can

give you an idea of how well developed those forces really are.
Sometimes the transmission keeps slipping.

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Thank you to those that stayed with me through the ramblings

above. I had more to present, but realized that this was already an epic. Perhaps I\'ve only restated the obvious,

I don\'t know. Perhaps I\'m SO far off base that it\'s laughable. Again, I don\'t know. I only ask that if

you\'d like to argue these points, that you do so in plain English. The only letters after my name are

\"Jr\".
_______________________________________

Here\'s where that\'s

from:
http://www.server2.love-scent.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&amp;Board=UBB4&amp;Number=117

78&amp;fpart=1&amp;PHPSESSID= (\"http://www.server2.love-scent.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&amp;Board=UBB4&amp;Number=11778&amp;fp

art=1&amp;PHPSESSID=\")

Oscar /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Golden_Gecko]

Yay! My first topic

gets 5 stars! Yippee! Do I get a drink for that? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif



</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
I would suggest that just the smell of Pheromones

will provide the activation of the Hypothalamus that the VNO is reputed to have an exclusive lock on. That is to say

that there\'s a programmed response to Pheromones triggered by our olfactory sense and cross-wired to the

hypothalamus, by-passing the VNO altogether. The programming being NOT a conditioned response but rather an input of

information from one piece of biological hardware to another by a means that is different from the original

configuration.


<hr /></blockquote><font class=\"post\">

So phermones DO work through merely smelling.

Thanks so much! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif Which means that either I have to get close, or

apply generously (not in crowded places though)

Now, secondly can you elaborate a bit more on the difference

between olfactory reponses and VNO responses on the phermones?

Thanks Gecko

[Friendly1]

Gecko did not prove

that pheromones work through olfactory sensation. The question remains highly debated.

However, I have noticed

that my pheromones can have an effect on women in a range of 15-20 feet (about 5-6 metres, for our European

friends). There may be a greater range where less visible effects occur, but I have stopped women in their tracks

merely by walking into that range.

I have also noticed an increase in nervous glances, hair flipping, and body

language mirroring when women are within 15-20 feet of me.

Women with children seem to be unaffected by the

pheromones. Younger teenage girls rarely react the way the older ones do. The cutoff point seems to be around 17

or 18. About that age, the girls start to respond very strongly to the pheromones. There seems to be no age limit

to when the responses stop. But I believe that when women are with their children, their bodies\' chemistry

changes in some way.

If no one has studied that kind of situation, they should. Women with children (beside them

or near them) just don\'t seem to have their man radar on.

[bjf]

Great post oscar. I wonder

if people could manipulate the vibration of molecules, whether any scent can be reproduced, therefore perhaps

inducing phero reactions.

In the original thread the comments about older women having better pheromone

conditioning was also great. It explains a lot of what I have seen in the field.

[markus]

very interesting post

oscar.

here is a little story: untill three months ago i was with one of those rare girls that cannot smell

a-none (i say rare because i think the 1 to 4 number is said usually in relation to men, where almost all women are

considered to smell a-none. am i right on this?). and this girl, even if she couldn\'t smell a-none, the

pheromones surely worked with her. i could get away even with 3 sprays of TE (i didn\'t try more, and even 3 i

tried very rarely). it was funny. we were going in the underground, everybody had cleared off sitting miles away,

and only she couldn\'t stop staring at me, kissing me and whispering she wants to go home and f*ck right now. so i

guess one could say the pheros were detected here not through her olfactory system, but in a different route. It

might be the VNO, and then we will have to conclude that a-none is detected by the VNO. or it could be a by pass of

the VNO which is NOT the olfactory system.
don\'t know if this helps, but i had the feeling this story is related

to the subject.

[markus]

</font><blockquote><font

class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />

However, I have noticed that my pheromones can have an effect on women in a

range of 15-20 feet (about 5-6 metres, for our European friends).

<hr /></blockquote><font

class=\"post\">

Thanks /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

</font><blockquote><font

class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
Younger teenage girls rarely react the way the older ones do. The cutoff

point seems to be around 17 or 18.

<hr /></blockquote><font class=\"post\">

what would be the conversion

to european girls\' age? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

[bjf]

From a previous

thread:

Regarding the Olfaction vs. VNO element of your question, there may
have
been some miscommunication

between you and Mr. Fields. Olfaction is a
completely separate reception process from VNO-reception, and while


there is
nothing that defines a \"pheromone\" as having to be detected by the VNO
to be
considered a

pheromone, it DOES have to be done without olfactory
detection
(smell) and on a subconscious level. I would be

surprised by anyone
who
claims to be knowledgeable about pheromones telling you that they work
because they

are \"smelled\" (olfaction), and I have to believe that
either
the Lacroy representative accidentally wrote

\"olfactory\" instead of
\"VNO\" or
doesn\'t understand the difference; remember that this is a chemical


manufacturing firm - not an accredited research facility actively
working on
this very science. In reality,

for the purposes we intend them for,
these
compounds really do need to be received by the VNO (VomeroNasal Organ

-
Vomer is Latin for plow; the organ sits within the mucous membrane that
covers the plow-shaped septum, the

cartilage that divides the nostrils)
in
order to work - that is the very basis behind modern pheromone


behavioral
modification, and until the discovery of the V1RL1 gene which is
responsible
for the existence of

the active VNO in humans, this was also the very
crux
of the argument on whether or not humans could even

receive pheromone
signals. Unfortunately, many lesser-educated individuals misunderstand
or
misinterpret much

of this information, and are less than careful with
terminology and it\'s use.

All that said, there is

nothing that says a smell or smelled compound
cannot
produce a subconscious effect - it\'s just not a

pheromone trigger.

Do some additional research, and I\'m certain you\'ll find more on the
answers
you

are searching for, but I think we\'re really all on the same page
here -
just being dogged by semantics.



Very kind regards,

Bob

Robert Jones, PhD
Industrial Tech Services
Stone Independent Research, Inc.

[jvkohl]

A research journal article

was published last month. It indicates that the human vomeronasal duct: the entry point to the putative human VNO is

not required for androstenone detection. If androstenone is a human pheromone, it is therefore unlikely that it

elicits an effect via the human VNO. Here\'s the link to the abstract of the

article.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&amp;db=PubMed&amp;list_uids=146748 34

&amp;dopt=Abstract (\"http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&amp;db=PubMed&amp;list_uids=146748 34&

amp;dopt=Abstract\")