Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1
    Banned User jvkohl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Northern Georgia
    Rep Power

    Default Olfactory researchers win Nobel Prize

    Colleagues Richard Axel and Linda Buck will receive their prize in December. Here's the news story. Feel free to

    substitute olfaction/pheromones for smell/odors to get a better feel for where the award may lead others. <br /> 2806

    Here's a link to Richard Axel's site...

    ...from which he links to my site "Scent

    of Eros"

    Yes, I'm

    bragging--how many Nobel Laureates link to any info about human



  2. #2
    Full Member culturalblonde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Rep Power


    Yes, I'm bragging--how

    many Nobel Laureates link to any info about human pheromones?

    Way to go! You have a right to brag. Thanks

    for sharing the information... very interesting.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Rep Power


    First, JVK, hope the link from

    Axel Labs brings you good things, public attention and peer respect. I'd brag too, in fact, I'd issue a press

    release and tell the world! And my mother in law.

    Second, I heard this announced on NPR (that's the boring

    high-brow radio stations at the bottom end of the dial for you kids). Richard Harris, NPR's science correspondent,

    ended his report by saying, "One thing that intrigues me is that both these labs (Axel's and Buck's) are trying to

    figure out how pheromones work -- if there are parallels between smell and pheromones. No one's proven that

    pheromones work in humans, but if they do, maybe that could explain that mysterious feeling we call 'animal

    magnetism." Link:

    Not that I doubt

    another journalist's word, (lol) but is that the case, Dr. Kohl? That "no one's proven that pheromones work in

    humans" ?

    I mean, massive DIHLs and mature professional women getting all giggly and hair-flippy is prima

    facie evidence enough for me, but I'm just a layman. Has anyone actually proven pheromone attraction in


    the Writerguy

  4. #4
    Bodhi Satva CptKipling's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Rep Power


    I think the point is; define


    Anecdotal evidence probably isn't what they are looking for, but for us it is. In fact, it's

    beneficial for us to do believe it.

    Information about pheromones: Pheromone Information Library

  5. #5
    Phero Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Rep Power


    Even though this is good

    news, I still hope mones dont become mainstream. There are ups and downs of them becoming more and more popular,

    but I like em "in the background" as they are now.
    Blessed are the cross-eyed, for they shall see God twice.
    Products I own: AE/m, APC/m, NPA/m, TE/m, SPMO, SOE/m, WAGG, Perception, EW, Chikara

  6. #6
    Administrator Bruce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Eugene, Oregon
    Rep Power


    Wow! That is great. Nice link too.

    Very impressive. I wonder what they will do with their $1.3 million.... Put it all into research???


    To enjoy good health, to bring true happiness to one's family, to bring peace to all, one must first discipline and control one's own mind. If a man can control his mind he can find the way to Enlightenment, and all wisdom and virtue will naturally come to him.

    - Buddha

    Yoga in Eugene
    Fair Trade crafts from Peru

  7. #7
    Banned User jvkohl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Northern Georgia
    Rep Power


    Quote Originally Posted by writerguy
    Not that I

    doubt another journalist's word, (lol) but is that the case, Dr. Kohl? That "no one's proven that pheromones work

    in humans" ?
    There is still considerable debate regarding use of the term "human pheromone." Of

    course this means "proof" that something not well defined "works" will be difficult. One group continues to show

    that something happens when the human VNO is stimulated; other groups show the human VNO is not required for a

    response to putative pheromones. To simplify all issues, in an unpublished review on sexual orientation, I defined a

    human pheromone as a chemical that elicits a luteinizing (LH) hormone response in a member of the opposite sex.

    (since the LH response to mammalian pheromones is well-known, and does not require a functional VNO). The LH

    response is repeatedly linked to behavioral change. So, one could reasonably expect that since, in women,

    androstenol elicits an LH change, that it also elicits a behavioral change (androstenol is found in male axillary

    secretions that have been linked to improved mood in women). Does mood improvement change behavior? Is it really the

    androstenol that alters both LH and mood? If so, is androstenol a pheromone? Too many questions that require too big

    a leap of faith for some hard-core scientists.

    Still, it seems appropriate to use a bit of logic, since you

    can logically get from axillary secretions containing androstenol to the LH change and to mood change (which is why

    pheromone -enhanced products containing androstenol can be expected to have a positive influence on the

    mood/behavior of women). But, no matter how much anecdotal evidence you read about the effectiveness of such

    products, hard-core scientists demand a formal double blind study with appropriate measures and statistics to show

    beyond the shadow of reasonable doubt that a human pheromone causes a change in behavior. And, as soon as you try

    to test humans, you introduce many more variables than can be statistically eliminated.

    The only real hope I

    see on the horizon is that researchers like Axel and Buck will find more proof that human pheromones influence human

    behavior--the same way that consciously perceived odors influence behavior, which means they will provide details on

    the receptor/signal interaction that leads to the LH change, and also link the LH change to a specific behavioral

    change. Nobel laureates tend to think "outside the box" or, minimally come up with unique ways to approach a

    problem. Since Richard and Linda have already made their mark with consciously perceived odors, they are quite

    likely to be at the forefront of some exciting new data on human



Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Lily of the Valley and Pheromones
    By Thanatos in forum Women's Forum
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 07-15-2004, 10:00 AM
  2. Wired article: Brain Scans Arouse Researchers
    By MysteriousMan in forum Open Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-24-2004, 09:20 AM
  3. Slot machine online prize?
    By Cloud9 in forum Pheromone Discussion
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 04-21-2003, 06:53 AM
  4. Nobel Prize for Jimmy Carter
    By CJ01 in forum Open Discussion
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 12-12-2002, 05:05 PM
  5. Visual vs. Olfactory
    By Irish in forum Pheromone Discussion
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 10-27-2002, 10:25 PM


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts