Close

Page 1 of 2 1 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 37
  1. #1
    Phero Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    364
    Rep Power
    8107

    Default Androstadienone Ineffective If VNO Is Blocked

    visit-red-300x50PNG
    Interesting approach - instead of wrangling about in the VNO debate (it's not wired up to the brain,

    can't prove it works so it doesn't, etc.), simply do a counter-experiment!

    It's well established that

    androstadienone has various effects on women. Soooo... how 'bout blocking their VNOs and see if androstadienone

    still has an effect? Guess what - block the VNO and you block the effects:



    http://www.ecro2006.com/eng/modules/news/a

    rticle.php?storyid=241


    Hey, they used to say the human appendix was a useless vestigal organ too (has an

    immune system function turns out, maybe more)...

    It's preliminary info with more verification to be done. If

    the little VNO does turn out to be truly operational lets digest that truth and move on...

  2. #2
    Phero Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    364
    Rep Power
    8107

    Default Androstadienone Ineffective If VNO Is Blocked

    Interesting approach - instead of wrangling about in the VNO debate (it's not wired up to the brain,

    can't prove it works so it doesn't, etc.), simply do a counter-experiment!

    It's well established that

    androstadienone has various effects on women. Soooo... how 'bout blocking their VNOs and see if androstadienone

    still has an effect? Guess what - block the VNO and you block the effects:



    http://www.ecro2006.com/eng/modules/news/a

    rticle.php?storyid=241


    Hey, they used to say the human appendix was a useless vestigal organ too (has an

    immune system function turns out, maybe more)...

    It's preliminary info with more verification to be done. If

    the little VNO does turn out to be truly operational lets digest that truth and move on...

  3. #3
    Doctor of Scentology DrSmellThis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    6,233
    Rep Power
    8665

    Default

    Yep, that's a good, logical

    approach.

    I wonder if they were able to block the VNO without affecting the rest of olfaction, though. That is

    a possible confound, and unfortunately the main thing you have to tease out.

    Methodology bears a closer look.
    DrSmellThis (creator of P H E R O S)

  4. #4
    Moderator belgareth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Lower Slovobia
    Posts
    7,961
    Rep Power
    8515

    Default

    Interesting. It looks like a

    well designed and controlled experiment. Do you know what year it was done? All I saw on dates was September 6th.
    To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.

    Thomas Jefferson

  5. #5
    Kodachrome Forever! Gegogi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Lost
    Posts
    2,708
    Rep Power
    7612

    Default

    Hmm, I was just reading the VNO

    lacks nerve pathways to the brain.

    I agree, short of surgery or a nose plug it would be extremely difficult to

    block the VNO and not block the main scent organs.
    "I'm just a dirty hornytoad" -Gegogi

  6. #6
    Moderator belgareth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Lower Slovobia
    Posts
    7,961
    Rep Power
    8515

    Default

    We'll have to see. That's a

    pretty high end group to make such an obvious blunder. Of course, we won't know if/until more information becomes

    available. Makes for some interesting thoughts though if it is true.
    To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.

    Thomas Jefferson

  7. #7
    Banned User jvkohl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Northern Georgia
    Posts
    1,127
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    The ERCO abstract was from the same

    group that released their most recent published findings in the Journal of Neuroscience. See the link to their press

    report, I posted earlier this

    week.

    http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/r...06_sweat.shtml

    The hormone response was not

    connected to any attempt at human VNO involvement; the VNO is not even mentioned in the article.


    Irish
    If the little VNO does turn out to be truly operational lets digest that truth and move

    on...
    It has not turned out to be operational, that's probably why researchers using human subjects

    don't mention it.

    James V. Kohl
    author/creator: The Scent of Eros

  8. #8
    Phero Pro
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    815
    Rep Power
    8274

    Default

    Far more important than digesting

    any VNO truth; is the fact that it seems beyond a reasonable doubt, that oral female contraception blocks the

    reception of Andrastodienone. Far more pertinet to the horn dogs of this forum.

  9. #9
    Phero Dude Marlboro_man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Pgh, Pa
    Posts
    484
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tounge
    Far more

    important than digesting any VNO truth; is the fact that it seems beyond a reasonable doubt, that oral female

    contraception blocks the reception of Andrastodienone. Far more pertinet to the horn dogs of this

    forum.
    Has that been proven, or is it just a theory of yours? I am just asking since I have never heard

    that before. Also, is it just oral contraception or do things like deprevera (not sure if spelled correctly) also

    have the same results.

  10. #10
    Phero Pro
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    815
    Rep Power
    8274

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marlboro_man
    Has that been

    proven, or is it just a theory of yours? I am just asking since I have never heard that before. Also, is it just

    oral contraception or do things like deprevera (not sure if spelled correctly) also have the same

    results.


    More than a theory of mine. Quite frankly I have always suspected pheromone usage

    was affected by oral contraception. There have been studies to back this up. Do a search. I believe that the recent

    Cal-Berkley study also made a point of this. This pill cause hormone changes in the user, which stands to reason

    that it would change a person's perception of a pheromone signal.

    As far as depo shots go, I would suspect

    the same situation, although when I brought this up a few months ago, I was rudely and wrongly castigated by the

    witch chick.

  11. #11
    Kodachrome Forever! Gegogi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Lost
    Posts
    2,708
    Rep Power
    7612

    Default

    It's a well established fact

    that women are more receptive to certain pheromones during ovulation, e.g., androstenone. Women radiate a certain

    male enticing pheromone only during ovulation. Oral contraception defeats both of those natural processes. Also,

    women on oral contraception don't smell nearly as sweet in their southern regions. Sweet 'n natural is good, but

    you have to be much more careful when you pull the trigger.
    "I'm just a dirty hornytoad" -Gegogi

  12. #12
    Phero Enthusiast PHP 87's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Posts
    286
    Rep Power
    8296

    Default Here's the article:

    Study: Men's

    perspiration boosts sexual arousal in women

    Saturday, February 10, 2007

    (02-10) 14:05 PST Berkeley,

    Calif. (AP) --

    A chemical in male sweat can boost mood, brain activity and sexual arousal in heterosexual

    women, according to a new study released just in time for Valentine's Day.

    The study offers the first direct

    evidence that humans secrete a scent that can affect the physiology of the opposite sex, said researchers at the

    University of California, Berkeley. Their findings were published this week in The Journal of

    Neuroscience.

    "This is the first time anyone has demonstrated that a change in women's hormonal levels is

    induced by sniffing an identified compound of male sweat," said study leader Claire Wyart, a postdoctoral fellow at

    UC Berkeley. "There is much more going on than we think when we are smelling body odor."

    The study

    conducted last year involved 48 undergraduate women who took 20 sniffs from a bottle containing androstadienone, a

    compound found in male perspiration and other bodily secretions.

    The researchers measured the women's levels

    of the stress hormone cortisol and compared them to the women's responses to a control odor. Cortisol levels in the

    women rose within about 15 minutes of inhaling the androstadienone scent and remained elevated for more than an

    hour, UC Berkeley researchers found.

    They also discovered that blood pressure, heart rate and breathing

    increased, mood improved and sexual arousal was boosted.


    While the compound can make women feel more

    positive and sexually aroused, it's still unclear how it affects their behavior, Wyart said.

    "Humans are

    more complex," she said. "You cannot expect them to have stereotypical responses like

    rodents."

    http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cg...n140520S56.DTL

  13. #13
    Kodachrome Forever! Gegogi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Lost
    Posts
    2,708
    Rep Power
    7612

    Default

    "Humans are more complex,"

    she said. "You cannot expect them to have stereotypical responses like rodents."
    And that, my

    friends, is the rub. If only life were so simple one could spray androstenone up the snout of an attractive human

    female and she'd immediately assume the mating position. Only in hog heaven... Instead, one must eat fire, walk on

    hot coals and jump through assorted hoops just to get to third base.
    "I'm just a dirty hornytoad" -Gegogi

  14. #14
    Stranger
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    24
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Interesting attitude. It is

    no small wonder the women flee the forum - the very women one might think you guys might want to keep around...what

    with their buying pheromones and stuff.----- CN

  15. #15
    PheroWizard oscar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Posts
    2,503
    Rep Power
    8686

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CuriousNewb
    Interesting

    attitude. It is no small wonder the women flee the forum - the very women one might think you guys might want to

    keep around...what with their buying pheromones and stuff.----- CN
    CuriousNewb,

    I'm uncertain

    as to which part of Gegogi's post it was to which you took umbrage.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gegogi
    And that, my friends,

    is the rub. If only life were so simple one could spray androstenone up the snout of an attractive human female and

    she'd immediately assume the mating position. Only in hog heaven...
    In the event you don't

    recognize the reference, what is being alluded to there is

    "Boarmate", an

    aerosol pheromone spray used in the process of swine

    husbandry.
    (Another Boarmate

    thread.)




    ...If, on the other hand, the part you took exception to was

    this:
    Quote Originally Posted by Gegogi
    ...Instead, one must eat fire, walk on hot coals and jump through assorted hoops just to

    get to third base.
    Then that's too bad.
    The "jumping through hoops" perception is one shared

    by many men about many women, and in my opinion, though arguably "stereotypical" in it's nature, is a perfectly

    valid observation.

    You too are allowed to voice your perceptions about the opposite sex here whether or not

    they are especially favorable ones.

    We DO however require men to be "Politically Correct" when they post in

    the Women's Forum, but not in this one. While women on the other hand are entitled to be politically INcorrect on

    both boards if they so choose.

    In my personal opinion "Political Correctness" and pheromone use for sexual

    attraction are concepts that seem to be somewhat at odds with each other, so I find it curious when someone of

    either gender asserts a PC stance on something written here. If we were "politically correct people" we probably

    would have a hard time justifying using pheromones to help us to attract the opposite sex.

    Oscar

  16. #16
    Stranger
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    24
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    While Geogi's post inspired

    my comments, I did not single him out - his are noto the only ones raising the concern.

    I'm not a PC type of

    person.

    I find it difficult to understand why pheromone usage requires us to want to reduce one another to

    mindless sex seekers, or why anyone would want such - so I do not understand your point about pheromone usage

    mitigating good manners.

    And - there are very few women in the women's forum. If indeed men are allowed to

    behave any which way in the regular forum, but men must only behave in the women's forum then I see why women

    don't stay. After all- the other forum doesn't say "Men's Forum" - it says Pheromone discussion - and in fact -

    is where most indepth discussion of pheromones happen without regard for gender - women pretty much HAVE to go there

    for further understanding - if they want to talk about anything other than "The Women's Product."

    I understand

    from a business perspective, the desire to let men act however they are going to act in the discussion of Pheromones

    - but I find it discouraging that some men think so poorly of women.

    CN

  17. #17
    PheroWizard oscar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Posts
    2,503
    Rep Power
    8686

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CuriousNewb
    While Geogi's

    post inspired my comments, I did not single him out - his are noto the only ones raising the concern.

    I'm

    not a PC type of person.

    I find it difficult to understand why pheromone usage requires us to want to reduce

    one another to mindless sex seekers, or why anyone would want such - so I do not understand your point about

    pheromone usage mitigating good manners.

    And - there are very few women in the women's forum. If indeed men

    are allowed to behave any which way in the regular forum, but men must only behave in the women's forum then I see

    why women don't stay. After all- the other forum doesn't say "Men's Forum" - it says Pheromone discussion - and

    in fact - is where most indepth discussion of pheromones happen without regard for gender - women pretty much HAVE

    to go there for further understanding - if they want to talk about anything other than "The Women's Product."



    I understand from a business perspective, the desire to let men act however they are going to act in the

    discussion of Pheromones - but I find it discouraging that some men think so poorly of

    women.

    CN
    CuriousNewb,

    You didn't quote which post(s) exhibited the attitude that you

    attributed to women's non-participation in this forum. I didn't think that any of the other posts in this thread

    were especially easy to perceive as being exemplary of having any "attitude" towards women besides the one that

    imagined them as sows. My mistake I suppose.

    Good manners and the concept of political correctness are two

    very different things. No where in MY post did I suggest that anyone who uses pheromones should be anything other

    than mannerly. You can read whatever you want into people's posts, but don't try attributing YOUR interpretations

    to their attitude. I've seen this too many times before. The words in the quote above about "mindless sex seekers"

    and "pheromone usage mitigating good manners" are yours, not mine.

    There is no "business perspective" in the

    running of this forum as far as the moderators go. It is a volunteer position. The task is to encourage the free

    expression of ideas.

    If you have a problem with someone's attitude, you're welcome to discuss it or ignore

    it. Your choice. But there will not be censoring of this forum for what some see as offensive attitudes.

    And

    now it's time to get back on topic. You are welcome to start a thread about men's attitudes towards women in the

    Open Discussion forum, but this thread is about Androstadienone and its effects on women.

    Oscar

  18. #18
    Phero Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    364
    Rep Power
    8107

    Default Spelling it out

    I knew I would have

    to do this...

    Mr. Kohl did indeed post a reference to an article published by the same group. That article

    in J. Neuroscience may be read at:

    http://www.jneurosci.org/cgi/content...urcetype=HWCIT
    It doesn't discuss the VNO because it isn't about the VNO.

    What I posted is a

    SEPARATE ISSUE. The same group is presenting preliminary evidence at the ECRO conference in favor of a VNO

    role.

    The SAME AUTHORS that Mr. Kohl cited about cortisol effects are presenting evidence, in another forum,

    supporting the idea of a functioning VNO. Get it?!?

  19. #19
    Doctor of Scentology DrSmellThis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    6,233
    Rep Power
    8665

    Default

    I have to admit I haven't

    reviewed the research on this in a while. Human pheromone research moves too slowly for my taste. Someday I'll do

    another review and catch up. JVK is the one who seems to keep track of every study that comes out.

    But my

    recollection from a couple years ago is simply that research to date has been inconclusive, except for the "Erox

    commissioned/related" studies, several of which reportedly suggest evidence of a "vague" effect (without

    articulating a pathway or process).

    Specifically, there has been no evidence to suggest a neural pathway for

    the VNO (a more recent study or two has addressed this); and evidence of its activity has been contradictory.



    The prevailing wisdom was simply that it is not theoretically necessary to posit the VNO to exist, in order to

    explain a detailed pheromone effect. You can get there with standard olfaction. So some researchers felt it was a

    waste of time to focus on the VNO.

    That was different from saying categorically that there is no active VNO.

    Last I checked I was not convinced the VNO has no role in olfaction. Maybe the intellectual scenario has changed

    recently, and I'd change my mind.

    But I've remained curious, partly because the organ would seem to be

    evolutionarily adaptive for some scenarios if it did exist; since you'd be bypassing the

    complexities/inefficiencies of standard olfaction.

    I'd like to see a comprehensive lit review on the issue,

    although Erox and gang (Berliner, et al) have felt little obligation to contribute to the scientific community,

    thinking they are sitting on the golden goose. Then I could give a more intelligent opinion.

    Again, I'd still

    like to know how they isolated the VNO from standard olfaction in the most recent study alluded to at the beginning

    of the thread. The procedure to do this is not obvious to me. That seems the most obvious area for initial critical

    review, methodologically.
    DrSmellThis (creator of P H E R O S)

  20. #20
    Banned User jvkohl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Northern Georgia
    Posts
    1,127
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Irish
    I knew I would have to

    do this...

    The SAME AUTHORS that Mr. Kohl cited about cortisol effects are presenting evidence, in another

    forum, supporting the idea of a functioning VNO. Get it?!?
    I suspected I would have to do

    this...

    The same authors presented (note: past tense) preliminary (note: waiting for final results),

    unpublished data at a conference prior to finalizing their study, and after finalizing it published it with no

    mention of the human VNO. What I "get" (from this) is that their preliminary data did not support the human VNO

    approach. On the off chance that it did, we will see a report from the same group that mentions the human VNO. Get

    it?!?

    James V. Kohl
    author/creator: The Scent of Eros

  21. #21
    Banned User jvkohl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Northern Georgia
    Posts
    1,127
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DrSmellThis
    I'd like to

    see a comprehensive lit review on the issue...
    DST: If you want the .pdf of the article at the URL

    below, I will need your current email address.



    [url]http://www.haworthpress.com/store/ArticleAbstract.asp?sid=F1AJ71WMKCP48HTMPW51HDT2GP 7Q5DS7&ID=90566[/ur

    l]

    Quote Originally Posted by DrSmellThis
    Again, I'd still like to know how they isolated the VNO from standard olfaction in

    the most recent study alluded to at the beginning of the thread. The procedure to do this is not obvious to me. That

    seems the most obvious area for initial critical review, methodologically.
    Isolation of the VNO was

    initially linked to a patented process/delivery system as I recall. This was seen by many researchers to be a 2nd

    red flag with regard to findings that could not be independently replicated on picogram amounts of "active"

    compounds.

    In the most recently reported published findings: "Thirty milligrams of AND..., were deposited in

    pure form into a 60ml... opaque jar, to be smelled by participants."

    From a human VNO activation to effect

    approach, it's picogram amounts and unreplicated data. From the more current non-VNO approach we're seeing effects

    with (let me check my math... uh?) -- a lot more of the compound.

    It's hard for me to imagine any woman

    ever being naturally exposed to 20 sniffs of 30 milligrams of AND. So, while it's good to see reports of hormonal,

    mood, and arousal change, I'm not sure how all this translates to product development.

    Seems we've now gone

    from activating the VNO with picogram amounts of AND, blocking the VNO and showing that it makes a difference

    (though the data may not be published or replicated) and finally come round to attacking the human

    olfactory/pheromonal processing system (sans VNO mention?) with massive doses of chemical.

    James V.

    Kohl
    author of a less recent review at: http://www.nel.edu/22_5/NEL220501R01_Review.htm

  22. #22
    Phero Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    364
    Rep Power
    8107

    Default Getting it

    I get it perfectly. Now

    you do too!

  23. #23
    Phero Pro
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    815
    Rep Power
    8274

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Irish
    I get it perfectly.

    Now you do too!


    I think Jim Kohl already had it.

  24. #24
    Phero Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    364
    Rep Power
    8107

    Default

    Yes, they seem to have the same

    concern that they were blocking only the VNO, and not olfactory surface as well.

    But this is still a

    fundamentally better test than what the Erox folk were doing... they were administering the pherins directly to the

    VNO through some device, and measuring electrical potential changes on the VNO. I'm not saying they didn't pull

    that off, but that's a pretty difficult medical and engineering task. Blocking off the VNO sounds a whole lot

    simpler. And now that -dienone effects are well established this seems to be a clever experiment to test for

    possible VNO activity.

  25. #25
    Doctor of Scentology DrSmellThis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    6,233
    Rep Power
    8665

    Default

    It's a big deal. If you

    interfere in any way shape or form with normal olfaction -- even in a strictly emotional way, for example; or if you

    simply distress the olfactory system via your procedures -- you don't know to what extent you're measuring VNO

    mediated changes. The whole bottom falls out of the study. I'm skeptical, for methodological reasons, rather than

    theoretical ones.

    That might be the reason for the delay in publishing the results, for all I know. It's way

    more likely a methodological problem, than some kind of belief about the VNO one way or the other.

    One way to

    solve that kind of problem, or to get a little closer to a solution (someone will find another valid

    criticism almost every time), is using various control groups.

    So if you're blocking the VNO with some kind of

    a patch, for example, you put identical patches near but not on the VNO for other groups, to rule out the patch

    itself as a "confound" (as inadvertently causing the results to some extent). But that's hard if you can't

    pinpoint each person's VNO precisely. Individual physiological variations are common here, unfortunately. So

    ideally you'd have more than one method of blocking the VNO, until enough reliability/validity studies have been

    done for your favorite procedure. Research is really hard! It could easily take a decade just to refine the

    procedure (to shut up everyone who wants to shoot holes in your research program).

    As my advisor once said, and

    this is my favorite quote from him, BTW, "you really have to bend over backwards to study human sexuality".



    Belagareth, it's not uncommon to be shocked at basic problems that professional researchers (much less

    "unprofessional" ones) leave unsolved/unaddressed; while still gleefully trumpeting their results from the highest

    mountaintop. I take little for granted. That is because humans are exceedingly difficult to study.

    That is why

    people should have to become experts on research methodology, as a prerequisite for studying anything human,

    especially at the level of complexity of human sexuality/relationships. The basic state of affairs is thinking

    you've got it figured out while you don't; until you learn as a mature scientist to mistrust fully your own

    "beliefs".
    DrSmellThis (creator of P H E R O S)

  26. #26
    Doctor of Scentology DrSmellThis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    6,233
    Rep Power
    8665

    Default

    Our results points

    against a role of the human main OE in processing the physiological and psychological effects of AND in humans.

    However more experiments assaying the impact of VNOblock on the sniff volumes will be performed by ECRO meeting to

    insure that the main OE was equally exposed to AND.
    That seems to explain the delay in publishing, as I

    expected. I hadn't read the abstract carefully. It has nothing to do with any diminished enthusiasm about their

    preliminary findings about the role of the VNO.

    I like their approach, overall. It's not without holes, but no

    study is. It's probably a good start.

    I'd still like to see the whole write up to understand more about their

    "VNOblock" procedures. I like that they try both physical and chemical blocks, for the reason I mentioned, and at

    least attempt to demonstrate whether standard olfaction is impeded by procedures. More control groups will be

    needed, obviously. Sounds like they're doing some of the things they need to be doing. May as well wait 'till you

    can really hit people between the eyes with it.

    My hunch is that a significant finding is brewing. I see no

    theoretical reason for cynicism. It looks like the preliminary results were highly significant.

    Before too

    long, the VNO might be back in a big way. So my advice, as always, is to be very careful what you conclude, at this

    point.
    DrSmellThis (creator of P H E R O S)

  27. #27
    Doctor of Scentology DrSmellThis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    6,233
    Rep Power
    8665

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jvkohl
    DST: If you want

    the .pdf of the article at the URL below, I will need your current email address.



    http://

    www.haworthpress.com/store/ArticleAbstract.asp?sid=F1AJ71WMKCP48HTMPW51HDT2GP 7Q5DS7&ID=90566






    Isolation of the VNO was initially linked to a patented process/delivery system as I recall. This was seen by many

    researchers to be a 2nd red flag with regard to findings that could not be independently replicated on picogram

    amounts of "active" compounds.

    In the most recently reported published findings: "Thirty milligrams of AND...,

    were deposited in pure form into a 60ml... opaque jar, to be smelled by participants."

    From a human VNO

    activation to effect approach, it's picogram amounts and unreplicated data. From the more current non-VNO approach

    we're seeing effects with (let me check my math... uh?) -- a lot more of the compound.

    It's hard for me to

    imagine any woman ever being naturally exposed to 20 sniffs of 30 milligrams of AND. So, while it's good to see

    reports of hormonal, mood, and arousal change, I'm not sure how all this translates to product development.



    Seems we've now gone from activating the VNO with picogram amounts of AND, blocking the VNO and showing that it

    makes a difference (though the data may not be published or replicated) and finally come round to attacking the

    human olfactory/pheromonal processing system (sans VNO mention?) with massive doses of chemical.

    James V.

    Kohl
    author of a less recent review at:

    http://www.nel.edu/22_5/NEL220501R01_Review.htm
    * I'm interested specifically mainly in just in reviews of the VNO studies. I realize there isn't that much out

    there. Unfortunately, most of it was behind closed doors.

    * I didn't see anything in the abstract about dosage.

    You'd think they'd vary it. It's not hard methodologically. You wouldn't even need more subjects.

    * The

    problem of isolating the VNO in this study is different that was addressed by Erox's patented delivery and

    measurement methods, if that's what you are referring to. The procedures are very different.

    * I just think the

    disinterest problem is that the VNO is correctly thought of as a secondary issue, compared to the importance of

    pheromones for humans in general; and researchers have more basic questions for now. That to me explains the lack of

    interest. In the big picture, human pheromone research is still in the infantile stage.

    * Obviously, that reason

    for disinterest doesn't apply to the Erox gang, who apparently believe worlds of Exxon-like profits await them if

    they focus on the VNO.
    Last edited by DrSmellThis; 02-13-2007 at 05:48 PM.
    DrSmellThis (creator of P H E R O S)

  28. #28
    Doctor of Scentology DrSmellThis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    6,233
    Rep Power
    8665

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jvkohl
    The same

    authors presented (note: past tense) preliminary (note: waiting for final results), unpublished data at a conference

    prior to finalizing their study, and after finalizing it published it with no mention of the human VNO. What I "get"

    (from this) is that their preliminary data did not support the human VNO approach. On the off chance that it did, we

    will see a report from the same group that mentions the human VNO.
    James V. Kohl
    author/creator: The Scent of

    Eros
    My understanding was rather that the series of studies is not close to being finalized; but that

    preliminary data suggested the active role of the human VNO, with a big caveat.

    You may have been thinking

    about the intial preliminary study being "finalized".

    But that was, apparently, always intended as one of a

    series, designed to address precisely the methodological problem of isolating the VNO from standard olfaction. That

    takes a while to do correctly, even though they appear to have addressed a part of it already. It was the

    first issue that occured to me, and no doubt the researchers as well. They're taking care of business, I suspect.



    In the mean time we have some highly intriguing initial results; that are none the less critically vulnerable to

    the criticism that their "VNOblock" may have interfered with standard olfaction -- for now. Oh well, sucks to be a

    scientist. One has to be patient.

    I don't believe we should interpret this normal delay as indicative of those

    researchers' enthusiasm for the VNO one way or the other. They are moving forward with their expensive program,

    apparently. So they must remain somewhat enthused about the possibility of a role for the VNO.
    DrSmellThis (creator of P H E R O S)

  29. #29
    Doctor of Scentology DrSmellThis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    6,233
    Rep Power
    8665

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Irish
    I get it

    perfectly. Now you do too!
    I think there may still be some misunderstanding about the studies, as regards the

    present discussion. I know I didn't "get it" at first gander.
    DrSmellThis (creator of P H E R O S)

  30. #30
    Banned User jvkohl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Northern Georgia
    Posts
    1,127
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DrSmellThis
    I don't

    believe we should interpret this normal delay as indicative of those researchers' enthusiasm for the VNO one way or

    the other. They are moving forward with their expensive program, apparently. So they must remain somewhat enthused

    about the possibility of a role for the VNO.
    I've found no recent indication that any researcher who

    presents at conferences or publishes in peer reviewed journals has any enthusiasm for the possibility of a

    functional human VNO. For example, I just reviewed abstracts from the 40th Annual Meeting of the Japanese

    Association for the Study of Taste and Smell, which may be the most recent olfactory conference from which abstracts

    are available. It's highly unusual for researchers to hide their work from other researchers, even briefly--as

    indicated by the ERCO abstract Irish posted. When the group then publishes without mention of the VNO, it seems more

    likely to me that they, too, have lost interest/enthusiasm.

    JVK
    author: The Scent of Eros: Mysteries of

    Odor in Human Sexuality

Page 1 of 2 1 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Androstadienone Ineffective If VNO Is Blocked
    By Irish in forum Pheromone Research
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-08-2007, 01:15 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-27-2004, 07:48 AM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-27-2004, 07:48 AM
  4. My androstadienone journal
    By PlayerINtraining in forum Pheromone Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-20-2003, 07:42 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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