View Full Version : Known pheromones
pieroilfiero
04-05-2004, 03:26 PM
So far, what i am
seeing in the love-scent product, is that there are 4 known pheromones
Androstenone / Rone / Nol / copulins
Is
all the variety of product a different concentration or mix of those 4, or are there other \"hidden\" pheros that
don\'t get their names written on the label? *curious*
cuddlebear
04-05-2004, 03:44 PM
Well, it\'s a
litle more complex than that ... WAGG contains mones but from what I understand none of the major 4 you listed ...
Some of the formulas have \"secret ingredients\" ... And you didn\'t mention A1 or Beta-Nol ... However, the
four you mentioned are the most often used mones ... read up on each product that interests you to find out about
its mone composition.
Mtnjim
04-05-2004, 03:52 PM
There are 100+ (112 I
think) known human ~mones. The ones listed are the commercially available ones. Some of the others, the researchers
have no idea what they do.
einstein
04-06-2004, 02:49 AM
That number seems
a little low to me. David Berliner has patents on about 5 different groups of steroids that could affect \"human
hypothalimic function\". He seems to lists about 100 compunds in each one.
He doesn\'t give specific effects
for them, although he does holds patents for using steroids to relieve pain and PMS. He mentions A1 a lot in the
PMS patent.
jvkohl
04-06-2004, 02:42 PM
To date, only -nol has
been linked to hormonal changes in women, and copulins as well as a progesteronic pheromone have been linked to
hormonal changes in men. Other steroid hormone derivitives appear to register in the hypothalmus of men differently
than in women, which may someday link the different response to hormones and behavioral differences. Bottom line:
the answer to the number of known pheromones pheromones depends on what you want to call a pheromone.
CptKipling
04-06-2004, 03:11 PM
...and copulins
is not one pheromone, it\'s a group of pheromones iirc.
jvkohl
04-06-2004, 04:30 PM
Copulins (the plural)
signifies a group of chemicals. But this group of chemicals is only effective as a group--and then only in the
ovulatory mix. Since only the ovulatory mix of copulins is effective in raising luteinzing hormone and testosterone
levels in men, \"copulins\" typically refers to one pheromone in the context of other pheromones, like -nol, which
raises luteinizing hormone in women, or when referring to other possible pheromones link -rone and -none. I\'ll
bet this is confusing to many people, but especially to those who speak English as a second language.
fran1
04-06-2004, 07:11 PM
JVK MASter thank for
the explanation.
CptKipling
04-07-2004, 09:09 AM
</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
Copulins (the plural) signifies a group of
chemicals. But this group of chemicals is only effective as a group--and then only in the ovulatory mix. Since only
the ovulatory mix of copulins is effective in raising luteinzing hormone and testosterone levels in men,
\"copulins\" typically refers to one pheromone in the context of other pheromones, like -nol, which raises
luteinizing hormone in women, or when referring to other possible pheromones link -rone and -none. I\'ll bet this
is confusing to many people, but especially to those who speak English as a second language.
<hr
/></blockquote><font class=\"post\">
I see, so (as a crude example) one or two of the ingredients from EW
splashed on will not work to create a hormone change. But, can these individual ingredients create a reaction from
association and conditioning?
jvkohl
04-07-2004, 09:34 PM
One or two of the
copulin chemicals are not likely to elicit the male hormone response, because it is the ovulatory phase combination
that conditions the male hormone response. However, women respond to less complex combinations of chemicals, like
-rone or -nol because these are merely signals of testosterone levels (reproductive fitness). Reproductive fitness
in men is tonic because testosterone levels do not fluctuate much during any given month. Since reproductive fitness
is cyclical in women, men are less likely than women to respond to individual chemicals. It takes the right
(ovulatory) combination to change hormone levels in men, otherwise male mammals, including men would have no
chemical cues to tell when the female is most likely to get pregnant. It was generally believed that men lost this
ability to sniff out fertility in women, until very recently when Dev Singh and Matt Bronstad showed that men prefer
the scent of ovulatory women. But study results have not really made it into the mainstream of knowledge about
properly timed reproductive sexual behavior in humans. This is not surprising since sniffing out fertility will
almost undoubtedly remain okay for other mammals, but not given much consideration by people who prefer to think we
don\'t respond to such cues. It\'s late, did I answer your question?
CptKipling
04-10-2004, 11:29 AM
</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
It\'s late, did I answer your question?
<hr
/></blockquote><font class=\"post\">
Yes, thanks /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
To date, only -nol has been linked to hormonal
changes in women, and copulins as well as a progesteronic pheromone have been linked to hormonal changes in men.
<hr /></blockquote><font class=\"post\"> JVK, copulins do raise testosterone levels in women too
/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif A good number of female users have noticed this effect on
themselves. When EW first came out most of us who tried it ended up getting horny one way or another. And I have
noticed it in other women when I use copulins by the reactions I get from them.
</font><blockquote><font
class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
Since only the ovulatory mix of copulins is effective in raising luteinzing
hormone and testosterone levels in men
<hr /></blockquote><font class=\"post\"> thanks for confirming my own
theory /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
CJ /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
jvkohl
04-10-2004, 04:56 PM
It would not be
appropriate for me to say copulins increase testosterone levels in women, based upon self reports of increased
libido. There are research results to show the effect on testosterone levels in men, by actually measuring hormone
levels. Other research reports show that the pheromones of women may either advance or retard ovulation, and this is
presumably via an effect on luteinizing hormone (LH) and follicle stimulating hormone. However, it is more
difficult to get from a LH change to testosterone in women than it is to get (i.e., directly) from LH to
testosterone level changes in men. Simply put, women are more complicated--but then most of us know that.
</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
It would not be appropriate for me to say copulins
increase testosterone levels in women, based upon self reports of increased libido. There are research results to
show the effect on testosterone levels in men, by actually measuring hormone levels. Other research reports show
that the pheromones of women may either advance or retard ovulation, and this is presumably via an effect on
luteinizing hormone (LH) and follicle stimulating hormone. However, it is more difficult to get from a LH change to
testosterone in women than it is to get (i.e., directly) from LH to testosterone level changes in men. Simply put,
women are more complicated--but then most of us know that.
<hr /></blockquote><font
class=\"post\">
Please specify what pheromone(s) have been indicated to retard ovulation. I have read (and
posted) a study that indicated Nol suppresses it, but I am guessing a study like that is not what you are referring
to, based upon your well-known stance on Nol.
JVK,I see what you´re
saying /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif My comment was not based on actual lab tests of course
just reports from other female users and observations I have made.
Is the feeling of
\"horniness\" only associated with testosterone increases, or would an LH spike directly induce such a conscious
feeling as well?
Could A-1 be one of the pheromones that suppresses LH spikes?
jvkohl
04-11-2004, 06:41 PM
<hr
/></blockquote><font class=\"post\">
Please specify what pheromone(s) have been indicated to retard ovulation. I
have read (and posted) a study that indicated Nol suppresses it, but I am guessing a study like that is not what you
are referring to, based upon your well-known stance on Nol.
<hr /></blockquote><font class=\"post\">
I must
have missed your post; please direct me to it. It was one of Martha McClintock\'s studies--from recall, probably
with Suma Jacob, and most likely the one in 1998. The study showed that the -unspecified- pheromones of females
altered menstrual cycle phase by either advancing or retarding it. The only -nol studies I\'ve seen attest to
it\'s ability to increase LH, which would advance the onset of ovulation. This is tricky, but first LH/FSH ratios
increase, then estrogen levels increase and prompt an ovulatory surge of LH and testosterone.
jvkohl
04-11-2004, 06:52 PM
</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
Is the feeling of \"horniness\" only associated
with testosterone increases, or would an LH spike directly induce such a conscious feeling as well?
<hr
/></blockquote><font class=\"post\">
Increased horniness is typically associated with the LH
and testosterone
increase--Martha McClintock was a co-author of a recent article, which i think is cited in my April update to my
website (which has not yet been posted to the site). The author\'s define a \"sexual\" phase of the menstrual
cycle--pretty bold stuff, but not all the endocrine details are in the article, since much of it is known to the
endocrinology folk.
So far as conscious perception goes, at best a woman would probably only be mildly aware
that she was more interested in \"getting laid\" during the ovulatory/sexual phase of the cycle--unless she
typically charts her cycle to correlate the endocrinology with her behavior--and even then only if she is not taking
oral contraceptives.
</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
Could A-1 be one of the
pheromones that suppresses LH spikes?
<hr /></blockquote><font class=\"post\">
I haven\'t seen anything
that would suggest this. Seems more likely that the whatever is suppressing LH (if it comes from other women) is of
estrogenic origin. This would be more characteristic of mammalian neuroendocrine function. When there are many
fertile (i.e., estrogenized) females in the vicinity, ovulation is suppressed in many of the females. The pheromones
\"tell\" the females that they\'re wasting effort on ovulation, since there probably aren\'t enough males in
the vicinity to fertilize all of them.
jvkohl
04-11-2004, 06:59 PM
BTF, here\'s the
citation info--might even have come from the post I asked you about.
Further evidence of chemical signalling in
humans comes from work by Martha McClintock: armpit swabs taken from donor women at a certain phase in their
menstrual cycle and wiped on the upper lip of recipient women can advance or retard menstruation in the recipients
depending upon the phase of the donor (Stern & McClintock, Nature (1998) 392, 177-179)
</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
BTF, here\'s the citation info--might even have
come from the post I asked you about.
Further evidence of chemical signalling in humans comes from work by Martha
McClintock: armpit swabs taken from donor women at a certain phase in their menstrual cycle and wiped on the upper
lip of recipient women can advance or retard menstruation in the recipients depending upon the phase of the donor
(Stern & McClintock, Nature (1998) 392, 177-179)
<hr /></blockquote><font
class=\"post\">
Hmmm...was wondering if it was the same as the \"dorm study\" and I guess it was.
Here is
the study I was referring to that spoke of Nol retarding LH releases.....it was posted in the women\'s forum, I
was wondering if Nol did produce LH spikes, whether the use of Nol would increase their own natural phero output or
something like the ovulatory copulin mix you recently spoke of.
However, the thread didn\'t do much to solving
that riddle, but here is the study....I believe I have seen one other one with the same results as well, but
didn\'t appear as
reliable.
http://chemse.oupjournals.org/cgi/co
ntent/full/25/4/465 (\"http://chemse.oupjournals.org/cgi/content/full/25/4/465\")
jvkohl
04-12-2004, 04:26 PM
Preti and Wysocki et
al showed the effect of men\'s axillary secretions on LH and mood in women. So it may be that the particular
combination of pheromones from men advances ovulation by increasing LH pulse frequency, while pheromones from women
typically retard LH pulse frequency (thus retarding ovulation). I don\'t think this will be clarified anytime
soon.
</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
Preti and Wysocki et al showed the effect of
men\'s axillary secretions on LH and mood in women. So it may be that the particular combination of pheromones
from men advances ovulation by increasing LH pulse frequency, while pheromones from women typically retard LH pulse
frequency (thus retarding ovulation). I don\'t think this will be clarified anytime soon.
<hr
/></blockquote><font class=\"post\">
Is this the study that the development of your product was based on?
jvkohl
04-14-2004, 02:40 PM
</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
Is this the study that the development of your
product was based on?
<hr /></blockquote><font class=\"post\">
The SOE for men product was introduced 1-2
years prior to
their report. However, their results were predictable given my mammalian model. This, despite Preti
and Wysocki\'s 1990 unpublished finding that their was no change in LH. I discussed this with them both at a
AChemS conference in the mid 90\'s, and they were already aware that the problem in attempting to find an LH
change was to control for the menstrual cycle variation, which they subsequently did. The influence of pheromones on
mood was an unexpected finding for me. It was easy to speculate about the mood change, but kudos to Preti and
Wysocki for documenting both the LH and the mood change.
I\'m still somewhat surprised that these findings,
combined with circa 2001 findings that androstenol influences LH in women, did not lead to dramatic increases in SOE
product sales. Combined with reports of SOE effectiveness, the biological support from recent studies should have
attracted the attention of most pheromone-enhanced product users. It\'s nice to see that you (bjf) are paying
attention. It may be a few more years before the complete rationale for also using androsterone in SOE becomes
widely known, but when you do read about the link between androsterone and sexual orientation, remember that SOE
contained androsterone from the start.
JVK:
Since you are
around the forum again, I figure I should get your opinion now on this. You said you recently co-authored a study
with Martha McClintock. I was wondering if I could get your opinion on some of her and others research regarding
smell and immunotype:
Smell and mate choice
Recent work from Martha McClintock\'s lab in Chicago shows
that women are able to detect minute differences in male immunotype by smell (Jacob et al., 2002). Immunotype is
conferred by HLA alleles, the genes that confer immunity in humans (the equivalent of MHC in animals), and
determines our individual smell. We tend to prefer smell of people who have different HLA alleles to our own. This
would mean the offspring of such a match would confer immune advantage - more different HLA alleles would be passed
on to the kids giving them a greater degree of immunity. We tend to be repelled by people whose immunotype (HLA
alleles) is similar to our own. It looks like we choose our partner on the basis of smell (Wedekind et al., 1997) -
well it would be one factor anyway. So, why do we spend so much time, and money, disguising it? Actually, we can
probably detect the HLA-related smell in spite of our best attempts to cover it up!
human leukocyte
antigen
http://www.findarticles.
com/cf_0/m1134/n7_v107/21084296/print.jhtml (\"http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m1134/n7_v107/21084296/print.jhtml\")
http
://www.nature.com/nsu/020114/020114-13.html (\"http://www.nature.com/nsu/020114/020114-13.html\")
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/que
ry.fcgi?holding=npg&cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_ui ds=11799397&dopt=Abstract (\"http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?holding=n
pg&cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11799397&dopt= Abstract\")
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/links/
doi/10.1111/j.1399-0039.2004.00146.x/abs/ (\"http://
www.blackwell-synergy.com/links/doi/10.1111/j.1399-0039.2004.00146.x/abs/\")
http://www.
ihwg.org/components/newallr.htm (\"http://www.ihwg.org/components/newallr.htm\")
http://www.abc.net.au/news/scitech/2002/01/item20020121101501_1.htm (\"http://www.abc.net.au/news/scitech/2002/01/item20020121101501_1.htm
\")
http://www.nature.com/nsu/010308/010308-10.html (\"http://www.nature.com/nsu/0
10308/010308-10.html\")
jvkohl
04-15-2004, 06:07 PM
</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
JVK:
You said you recently co-authored a study
with Martha McClintock.
<hr /></blockquote><font class=\"post\">
Sorry you got the wrong impression, I have
never co-authored with Martha.
</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
I was wondering if
I could get your opinion on some of her and others research regarding smell and immunotype:
<hr
/></blockquote><font class=\"post\">
All the work to date shows that we maintain the same ability that tracking
dogs use to sniff out differences in genetic diversity (i.e., tissue type). It would be difficult to explain why the
ability is maintained, unless we still use it--as many others have suggested, since Carole Ober first reported this
at a 1993 genetics conference (and published 4 years later). However, this is not an ability we need to be trained
to use. If you want to train an animal to use such an ability, humans aren\'t the best choice. The first problem
would likely be that whomever you were trying to train wouldn\'t think/believe they had the ability in the first
place. Humans are such simple creatures in this regard. For example, most humans think that visual input is more
important to sexual development than is olfactory input. Silly people! They should be trained to read the Pheromone
Forum if only for educational purposes. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif
</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
It would be difficult to explain why the ability
is maintained, unless we still use it--as many others have suggested, since Carole Ober first reported this at a
1993 genetics conference (and published 4 years later).
<hr /></blockquote><font class=\"post\">
From your
own work:
In humans, female olfactory preferences also seem to induce disassortative mating for components of the
major histocompatibility complex (MHC) as is observed in other mammals [100]. In other words, olfactory cues may be
able to reflect parts of an individual\'s genome, and body odor seems to influence female mate choice in order to
find a partner who possesses fitting MHC-dependent immune system components. Simply put, ovulatory women seem to
prefer the scent of genetic diversity. Indeed, both women who are not taking oral contraceptives, and men rate
similar genetically determined odors as less attractive than dissimilar genetically determined odors. Thus, not only
are men and women able to distinguish among genetically distinct, self versus non-self odors, they prefer the scent
of non-self (i.e., genetic diversity) [101]. Men and women with shared markers of genetic diversity also select
perfumes that may amplify body odor that is linked to their genetic diversity
web page (\"http://www.nel.edu/22_5/NEL220501R01_Review.htm\")
Do you (still) subscribe to the
theory?
jvkohl
04-16-2004, 05:55 PM
</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
Do you (still) subscribe to the theory?
<hr
/></blockquote><font class=\"post\">
Yes, but it\'s more biological fact than theory. Still, I suspect you
have read about the study reporting that women
liked the smell of their father best. Martha commented to
a
sexology list about the report on that one. The mass media interpretation was a somewhat typical
misrepresentation.
Nice to see you have read my NEL review; it\'s not an easy read for most people.
</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
</font><blockquote><font
class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
Do you (still) subscribe to the theory?
<hr /></blockquote><font
class=\"post\">
Yes, but it\'s more biological fact than theory. Still, I suspect you have read about the
study reporting that women
liked the smell of their father best. Martha commented to
a sexology list about the
report on that one. The mass media interpretation was a somewhat typical misrepresentation.
Nice to see you have
read my NEL review; it\'s not an easy read for most people.
<hr /></blockquote><font
class=\"post\">
Right, I actually was going to say that I guess it was a case of media misrepresentation. Just
because they conciously like certain smells better does not mean it has any affect on sexual behavior or biology,
but I wonder if it is a regular subconcious factor.
The NEL reading isn\'t that hard, easier then some of your
older posts (you are getting alot better /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif).
Do you think
metabolites of LH could act as a pheromone, or is that hormone not sex specific enough to relay any pertinent
information that humans would find worth picking up?
jvkohl
04-17-2004, 07:29 PM
</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
Do you think metabolites of LH could act as a
pheromone, or is that hormone not sex specific enough to relay any pertinent information that humans would find
worth picking up?
<hr /></blockquote><font class=\"post\">
The LH change (increase) translates to increased
testosterone (and its metabolites in men), and to increased estrogen (and its metabolites in women). But in women,
the increased estrogen (due to LH) causes LH to surge at ovulation which leads to increased testosterone in women.
The whole scenario is ridiculously complex, since LH levels are regulated by gonadotropin releasing hormone pulse
frequency, and feedback mechanisms that influence pituitary and hypothalamic hormone secretion, as well as just
about everything else.
Bottom line: LH is part of the process by which pheromone production changes; it is not a
pheromone and neither are its metabolites--so far as is currently known.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.