"Charlatans selling pheromone
perfumes as attraction potions and the like discredited it"
I heartily agree - commercial interests are stifling
research (trade secrets) and discrediting the subject.
Someone asked
why I keep focussing on research that disproves the human VNO approach. Here's a relatively plain answer in the
recent article at this
URL:
http://www.inklingmagazine.com/artic...melling-daddy/
["pheromone
theories in humans no doubt receive harsh criticism," Matchock admits. However well accepted in other mammals, the
notion of chemical sexual signals is often mocked in humans. "Charlatans selling pheromone perfumes as attraction
potions and the like discredited it," he deplores.]
See:
Matchock RL, Susman EJ. Family composition and
menarcheal age: Anti-inbreeding strategies. Am J Hum Biol. 2006 Jul-Aug;18(4):481-91. "...a putative pheromone
receptor gene was recently found in human olfactory mucosa near the primary olfactory bulb..., implying that the
VNO... may not be a prerequisite for pheromone detection.
JVK
"Charlatans selling pheromone
perfumes as attraction potions and the like discredited it"
I heartily agree - commercial interests are stifling
research (trade secrets) and discrediting the subject.
I received manyOriginally Posted by ratspeaker
positive comments when "The Aprhodisiac Test" aired in the UK (featuring SoE products as one of several
"aphrodisiacs"). Overall, I kept getting the message that no one had ever before heard anything about human
pheromones in a believable format. Those that knew anything about them had only heard the "guaranteed to get you
laid" marketing claims. After a realistic approach, there was much more interest--as evidenced by hits to
that transferred to Love-scent.com.
When I see posts that are likely to do more
to discredit the subject than evoke interest, I become concerned. But, as others have noted, it's not all about the
science--and at least the General Discussion Forum doesn't get too many of the discrediting claims. Research
proceeds, albeit at a slower pace than it might have without the rididculous marketing claims. But I think that the
scientific approach will someday prevail, since there is no reason not to incorporate "real" science into the
approach.
JVK
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks