Evolution, Bacteria, and -Mones

[Pancho1188]

I was

just reading the \"Purer Ingredients\" thread about pheromone smell, bacteria, etc...and it got me thinking.

Haven\'t human and animal evolution evolved to a point where bacteria would actually help pheromones do

their jobs correctly?!? Bear with me here...it\'s gonna get ugly...

(Set down all food and beverages before

reading)

Ever wonder why medicine such as antibiotics may cause diarrhea? Well, the bacteria in the intestines

help to break down particles in your system and absorb them (ever wonder why yogurt is so good for you?).

Antibiotics and other medicines kill that bacteria, which actually causes a little havoc in the digestive system,

which can lead to...how do you say...less than pleasant bowel movements. The point of this less than pleasant

description is that many scientists believe that the human/animal body, through evolution, adjusted to bacteria in

the system and actually relies on it as part of normal, healthy functioning.

Now, the question is that pheromones

have also existed for many, many years so you would think that some species\' bodies would have adapted to the

situation in a way that would somehow make pheromones work just as well if not better under bacteria-filled

conditions. People talk about how bacteria make unfavorable transformations to -mones, but wouldn\'t evolution

have made the proper adjustments? Maybe humans don\'t rely on pheromones anymore so it\'s not an

issue............

What do you think are the implications to pheromone use and how do you think this can somehow

allow us to utilize pheromones more successfully?

[ToBeOrNotToBe]

</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
Ever wonder why medicine such as antibiotics may

cause diarrhea? Well, the bacteria in the intestines help to break down particles in your system and absorb them

(ever wonder why yogurt is so good for you?). Antibiotics and other medicines kill that bacteria, which actually

causes a little havoc in the digestive system, which can lead to...how do you say...less than pleasant bowel

movements. The point of this less than pleasant description is that many scientists believe that the human/animal

body, through evolution, adjusted to bacteria in the system and actually relies on it as part of normal, healthy

functioning.


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

Actually, by killing some species of

bacterias that live in our body, the antibiotics allow other bacterias to \"grow\" and these may cause a

pathological condition, which will result in diarrhea, among other symptoms. Remember that the bacterias that live

in our organism can bring us several benefits, like, for example, protecting us from other bacterias (that aren\'t

usually normal habitants of our body).

But the lack of metabolization of some particles can also contribute

to the diarrhea.

Sorry for any grammar mistake...

[ToBeOrNotToBe]

</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
People talk about how bacteria make unfavorable

transformations to -mones, but wouldn\'t evolution have made the proper adjustments?

<hr /></blockquote><font

class=\"post\">

And why is that necessarily a \"bad thing\"? Perhaps pheromones are also meant to be

metabolized...

[CptKipling]

Nice post.

I think under normal conditions bacteria are part of our body\'s natural \"pheromone system\".

They probably have a role in controlling accumulation by conducting \"pherolysis\" (molecular phero splitting;

just trying to sound fancy /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif ) or other digestion processes, and our

bodies probably aim to replace our pheros at the same rate that they are lost naturally (which include other factors

apart from bacterial action). They probably convert some pheros into other pheros, and maybe some non-pheromonal

fatty acids, proteins, and hormones into pheromones; something that we have some empiricle evidence for.

However,

I think that when we drastically augment the pheromones levels on our skin we encorage a population explosion of

certain types of bacteria. I have no idea of which ones cause the trouble (or even if it is bad at all...), it could

be a completely unuseful variety that is normally found in very limited quantities, or it may be the case that large

quantities of otherwise desirable bacteria end up being a hindrence.


p.s. According to the people at Lynx

(AXE), the bacteria responcible for creating BO rely on iron on the skin to survive (their products bind with

iron... I\'m not sure of the whys and hows of this, there is an email posted on the forum about it).

[ToBeOrNotToBe]

</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
However, I think that when we drastically augment

the pheromones levels on our skin we encorage a population explosion of certain types of bacteria.

<hr

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

That doesn\'t make much sense. A situation like that could lead to

infections. Some bacteria species live in our body, but when there is a problem with our immunitary system, there

can be an increase in the number of bacterias of those species, which will lead to an infection (with endogenous

cause, of course, since it is caused by natural habitants of our body).

It doesn\'t make sense to me that an

increase in the pheromone levels (which is not constant, I think, unless we try to use pheromones really often for a

long long period of time) cause an explosion in any kind of bacteria specie.

[CptKipling]

I

never referenced anything to the immune system, in fact, the immune system has no active responce to skin surface

bacteria.

Let me explain.

There are apparently bacteria on our skin that metabolise pheromones and other

compounds. It makes sense to assume that these bacteria need the products of the digested compounds for a function

within themselves, be that energy, growth/repair, etc.; it is VERY improbable that the bacteria would metabolise

anything if it didn\'t help them reproduce. Now, it is known that when any species is exposed to an ample supply

of food, they will reproduce, simply because they can. When we apply the quantities of pheromones that we do, we are

providing them with an ample supply of food.

[ToBeOrNotToBe]

I understand what you are trying to say, but pheromones could never be what you call an \"ample supply of food\".

However, even if it could be that and lead to explosion in the number of bacterias of some species, that would be

noticed, since those variations (of the number of the comensal bacterias) usually bring endogenous infections

(endogenous, since are caused by normal habitants of our organism).

[ToBeOrNotToBe]

I find it hard to explain what I\'m trying to say, since my English is not the best... sorry about that...

[CptKipling]

That\'s cool, I\'m rubbish at getting my point across sometimes and I\'m born and bread English

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

When I said

there would be a population explosion, I was probably painting a very exaggerated picture.

I don\'t think that

any bacteria rely only on pheromones as a source of food. But, the small natural quantities that are naturally

present could be a limiting growth factor for some species. Having more pheromones present on a regular basis could

result in a change in the frequency of the different populations on your skin. Another possibility is that the same

bacteria just get more used to digesting pheros, so the genes coding for pheromone digesting enzymes are expressed

more frequently. This could then have an effect on our exogenous pheros a while after we have applied them.

To

address the question at the end of Pancho\'s post; I think creating a dilute AE \"body wash\" gives good

results. Because AE\'s ratios are similar to the our natural ratios, covering a large area of skin should

replicate nature to some degree. If my thinking regarding bacteria is correct, then small amounts shouldn\'t

create problems. I have also always been curious about what -rone can be changed into, and this method - in theory -

allows us to investigate the effects of -rone conversions (although dilute -rone on it\'s own would be better).