Close

Page 1 of 3 1 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 76
  1. #1
    Enlightened One
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    4,678
    Rep Power
    8372

    Default Phero effectiveness on women - a article - useful

    visit-red-300x50PNG
    http://news.ninemsn.com.au/Health/story_35982.asp

    This article could explain why women react and remember someone (male) when they have pheromones on. It seems women are more inclined to remember emotional intensive effects both good and bad. That is why pheromones seem to be so useful to men in this regard. It seems to be how their brains are wired, the hormonal impact then sets off events and they react to the feel good effect.

  2. #2
    Full Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    119
    Rep Power
    7939

    Default Re: Phero effectiveness on women - a article - useful

    hmmmmmm so women have better memories than guys do when dealing with emotions ... well that makes sense if i tried to memorize all the emotionally stimulating porn i\'ve seen in the past three weeks i\'d have no room to store any other memories, girls have much less to remember ...mmmm porn....huh what was i talking about?

    ahhh screw it ya got 25 posts out of me now am i a newbie?

    all your base are belong to us -god-

  3. #3
    Phero Dude
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Posts
    506
    Rep Power
    8338

    Default Re: Phero effectiveness on women - a article - useful

    It\'s probably also why they remember *EVERY* *LITTLE* *MISTAKE* *YOU* *MAKE.* [img]/ubbthreads/images/icons/smile.gif[/img]

  4. #4
    **DONOTDELETE**
    Guest

    Default Re: Phero effectiveness on women - a article - useful

    I believe that this is very true, but there are some exceptions with it. You basically have to train yourself to remember everything. All you have to do is, when you see something, smell or the way you feel. Stop for a moment and think about it and make a mental note about it like.... that looks cool, or that smells good, or the way you feel at the moment. In the future you will be able recall the feeling that you had a couple months or years ago. It will amaze yourself how much you can remember about a certain thing that happened in the past.

  5. #5
    Phero Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    241
    Rep Power
    7979

    Default Re: Phero effectiveness on women - a article - useful


    In National Geographic \"NATGEOMAX\" show it has been shown that women rate men first on their smell, second on their apperance and last on their personality. While men rate women first by their appearance and second on their smell and last on their personality. That is why those women with a Waist to HIP ration of 0.7 appears most appealing to men.

  6. #6
    Phero Pro
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    742
    Rep Power
    7968

    Default Re: Phero effectiveness on women - a article - use

    Yeah, I saw that, too. 0.7? They say we can just see that WTH ratio. But it probably has to do with the first impression, \'cause personality gets more and more important over time.

  7. #7
    Phero Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    241
    Rep Power
    7979

    Default Re: Phero effectiveness on women - a article - use

    Yup if the Waist to Hip ratio of a woman is 0.7 they would be perceived by the males as an attractive female because a WTH of 0.7 signifies good health and good pelvic bone,uterus etc.

    That is why a woman with a Waist of 24 cm and a HIP of 34 cm appears sexy 24 divide by 34 = 0.70

    Of course we don\'t have to measure a womans waist and hip. By instincy alone we can already determine by visual inspection.


  8. #8
    Banned User jvkohl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Northern Georgia
    Posts
    1,127
    Rep Power
    0

    Default Re: Phero effectiveness on women - a article - use

    Most likely the 0.7 WHR is perceived as attractive due to pheromonal conditioning of the visual response. WHR is simply a matter of fat distribution, which is largely determined by sex hormones (like estrogen and testosterone). Estrogen gives the women their 0.7 WHR and testosterone gives the men their 1.0. Since these hormones also contribute to pheromone production, which is either of the more masculine or more feminine type, the link from these hormones to pheromones and thus to the effect of pheromones on the hormones of the opposite sex is the only biological means by which a personal preference can become established. There is no direct link from visual input to hormone levels in other people, so that\'s why visual input can\'t establish what we prefer as a WHR. Most people just don\'t think about the effect of olfactory/pheromonal conditioning, but I devote several paragraphs to it in the revised edition of my book, which will be available soon. The conditioning begins at birth, so think about what happens between birth and puberty before arguing that the WHR is in any way a visual phenomenon. Besides, Dev Singh (of WHR fame--and who, as did I, attended both the prestigious 1995 and 2000 conferences on the biological basis of behavior) and Matt Bronstad published results saying that men prefer the scent of women who are ovulating (another finding based on animal data). If we can smell them ovulating, we certainly can also smell the difference between a great WHR and a mediocre WHR, and learn to make the best associations with those ever popular 0.7\'s. One more comment, there is no animal model that even hints at why the most appealing WHR would be based on visual input.

  9. #9
    Phero Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    241
    Rep Power
    7979

    Default Re: Phero effectiveness on women - a article - use


    What about the mathematical ratio of BEAUTY which is 1:1.618 does it have a connection with the pheromones also ?

    It says that \"Women with elements of the face with a ratio of 1:1.618 to each other are perceived by Men as beautiful\"


  10. #10
    Doctor of Scentology DrSmellThis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    6,233
    Rep Power
    8665

    Default Re: Phi; Kohl

    Worth trying! That\'s the phi ratio, isn\'t it? The Greeks used it for all their human statues, which are renowned for their beauty.

    Well, Ferro, if you take that ratio and apply it to 3 mones with low #\'s, it would be closest to 5:8:13, somewhere between p10 and AE! If you added a fourth and fifth pheromone, 3:5:8:13:21, and so on.

    OK, you chem set geometry freaks! Let\'s try 3 -rone, to 5 -nol, to 8 A1, to 13 -none!

    I love sacred geometry so this is interesting.

    Dr. Kohl\'s comments are very interesting, too, if a bit monothematic.

    Let\'s do a thought experiment: If you show people who were randomly assigned to two groups two sets of human pictures, one set with subjects close to the Greek mathematical dimensions of physical beauty (which are quite detailed and apply to most of the body); and one that deviates quite a bit from such ideal dimensions (but were not otherwise chosen to be systematically different); and measure all the known potentially relevant hormonal changes in a viewer after having seen them, you might find quite a large \"visual beauty effect\". I doubt seriously that this study has been done.

    Imagining such likely results, it would not ultimately be parsimonious to theorize that pheromonal conditioning caused these Greek dimensions to be perceived as beautiful, as there is no experimental evidence to indicate causation, rather than correlation.

    Further, the concept of multiple perceptual determinants of beauty sits better with common sense. We are not \"just noses\", any more than are peacocks or other animals. Is there really a preponderance of well done studies of peacocks, for example, that show the presence/absence of plumes has no impact on mating behavior? I doubt it.

    Regarding humans, recent neurological research indicates that there are actually brain cells in the eye, cells that already impart simple meanings to visual stimuli, before they leave the optic nerve! Talk about a direct eye/brain connection! Visual beauty is like a drug in it\'s intensity --- hence, the absolutely soaring numbers of marriages broken up over internet porn addiction. It is indeed one of the few most common reasons for couples counseling now.

    Another thought experiment, to test whether the exact opposite of what Dr. Kohl is suggesting could be true -- I bet you could condition men to be attracted to the absolute \"wrong\" pheromone profiles, by repeatedly pairing such smells with beautiful pornogrphic images or gorgeous in-person models. However, were this likely result to occur, I would not go so far as to argue that olfactory beauty is totally determined by visual conditioning in real people, as did Dr. Kohl for the oppsite directional effect.

    I have lots of respect for Dr. Kohl\'s insights. We are probably all a bit monothematic as regards our own field of accomplishment. When we have an excellent hammer, everything we see starts to look like a nail. [img]/ubbthreads/images/icons/smile.gif[/img]

  11. #11
    Doctor of Scentology DrSmellThis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    6,233
    Rep Power
    8665

    Default Re: Phi; Kohl

    3:5:8:13:21



  12. #12
    Phero Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    364
    Rep Power
    8108

    Default Re: Phi; Kohl

    One way to test if humans are capable of independent visual perception of beauty apart from lifelong olfactory conditioning would be to test lifelong anosmics (otherwise normal) to see if they share typical views of visual beauty.

    Personally I think we have some visual hardwiring tied to the concept of beauty. I read that newborns show a preference for classical attractive faces, presumably before they have had a chance to form conditioned responses to olfactory cues.

    I like the concept held by some that visual and olfactory/pheromonal pathways are redundant channels to increase the chances of identufying the \'superior\' mate. I tend to think these dual hardwired channels reinforce and mutally condition our responses as we gain experience with the opposite sex.

  13. #13
    Bodhi Satva CptKipling's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    5,142
    Rep Power
    8498

    Default Re: Phi; Kohl

    3:5:8:13:21

    A1:rone:cops:nol:none

  14. #14
    Banned User jvkohl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Northern Georgia
    Posts
    1,127
    Rep Power
    0

    Default Re: Phi; Kohl

    Despite hormonal changes that correlate well with a \"beauty effect,\" there is no known means by which this effect could occur due to visual input alone. There simply is no direct connection between what we see and hormones that influence behavior, a connection that must be made before anyone goes on about how important visual input is to behavior. One pathway leads from the social-environment to behavior: gene-cell-tissue-organ-organ system. Pheromones alter genes in hormone secreting nerve cells of tissue in the brain, the most important organ of any organ system involved in behavior. Nothing about visual pathways provides nearly as clear cut a link. In fact, with visual input, there is no link between the social environment (nurture) and nature (genetic make-up).

    DrSmellThis is diplomatic when referring to my monothematic (i.e., hammer/nail) approach. Others I\'ve encountered have been less diplomatic; and usually tend to \"run away\" as soon as I ask what model for the development of visual preferences they suggest be used to explain human physical attraction. THERE IS NO MODEL!

    With regard to \"wrong\" conditioning; the olfactory model has been applied very effectively with males who are pathologically attracted to children. Olfactory aversion therapy is the most effective treatment--even better than chemical castration. With regard to different forms of olfactory conditioning--my ASCAP article on homosexual orientation, also explains bisexuality and transexuality using the ever present mammalian model in which pheromones determine--yes, just about everything!

    Finally, studies on human males born with no sense of smell, or animal males that have their olfactroy pathways ablated at birth, show very definite developmental disorders when it comes to \"knowing\" the opposite sex. Reportedly, men with Kallmann\'s syndrome: hypothalamic hypogonadism with anosmia, don\'t fall in love. They exhibit erotic apathy, delayed sexual firsts (despite hormone treatment), and seem to have great difficulty bonding with any other human--including their mother. Exactly what one would expect from every bit of mammalian data with regard to olfaction/pheromones.

  15. #15
    Full Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    112
    Rep Power
    7966

    Default Re: Phi; Kohl

    I would do

    3:5:8:13:21

    rone:cops:A1:Nol:None

  16. #16
    Phero Dude
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Posts
    506
    Rep Power
    8338

    Default Re: Phi; Kohl

    JVK,

    Freakin\' WOW!!!

    Is any of this stuff available on the web? This is the kind of stuff I think I would like to read.

    If only I\'d had better teachers, I could have gone into biology myself. Only problem is, when I said I want to make some new friends, I wouldn\'t have meant the usual way!

  17. #17
    Carpal Tunnel Whitehall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Silicon Valley, California
    Posts
    2,642
    Rep Power
    8399

    Default Common sense

    \"THERE IS NO MODEL\" only speaks to the formal level of current scientific understanding, a social invention, not to the underlying pheomonena. Your hypothesis of complete and sole dependence on pheromones for sexual stimulation - directly and indirectly through conditioning - is counterintuitive. You\'ve put yourself in the position of proving a negative - good luck!

    I\'d predict that the result of your thesis will be someone looking for an inbreed and hardwired visual model of sexual attractiveness. I bet they will eventually find it too while teaching us more about pheromones too.

    Isn\'t science great!

  18. #18
    Phero Dude abductor's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    London UK
    Posts
    458
    Rep Power
    8011

    Default Re: Common sense

    I agree with JVK when he says that a \"beauty model\" doesn\'t exist. What is the prettiest woman ? Zeta-Jones, Demi Moore, Marilyn Monroe (with Channel n. 5). But easily we can tell \"that woman is very good scented\" ...

  19. #19
    Enlightened One
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    4,678
    Rep Power
    8372

    Default Re: Common sense

    Remember however that women will trade sexual attraction in favour of money the odd thing about humans is our young need support and protection for 15 years of upbringing, so there fore need a good provider with committment. Dont go into the discussion on the alpha vs beta genetic vs committment argument lol.

  20. #20
    Phero Dude
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    599
    Rep Power
    8079

    Default Re: Common sense

    There is evidence that women look for men as:

    - Providers: to marry and take care of them and their children.
    - Fertilizers: to have sex with and get pregnant by.

    Unfortunately, there\'s also quite a lot of evidence that women tend to look for different men to provide these two functions.

  21. #21
    Enlightened One
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    4,678
    Rep Power
    8372

    Default Re: Common sense

    10% of men provide both but in the providers benefit is that they can distract women by romance presents and the threat of a withdrawl of support if they cheat and the guy finds out. Hey things are changing but women still get depressed more if they are single therefore some still keep a guy around.

  22. #22
    Phero Dude
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    599
    Rep Power
    8079

    Default Re: Common sense

    My guess: alpha males are more likely to be fertilizers, betas more likely to be providers.

    But are women less likely to cheat on alphas? I don\'t know... in baboons, the alpha male has a harem of females. The betas stay on the outskirts -- he chases them away if they get too close. But the females sneak off and have sex with the betas.

    All kind of confusing, huh?

  23. #23
    Enlightened One
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    4,678
    Rep Power
    8372

    Default Re: Common sense

    Well the females need to be serviced and the alpha can only be strecthed so far so the females sneak off to the betas and do em over. In humans however women think of alphas in many different types of frame of mind. Ie a small guy might be the alpha for a tall chick but small women might want the tall guy. I have heard that women look for thier opposites for sexual preferences.

  24. #24
    Full Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    162
    Rep Power
    7916

    Default Re: Phero effectiveness on women - a article - use

    Speaking of creepy, look at the Greek ratio for beauty and the ideal waist-to-hip ratio:

    Greek ratio: 1:1.618
    Hip-to-waste: 0.7

    1/1.618 = 0.62

    Coincidence, anyone?

  25. #25
    Enlightened One
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    4,678
    Rep Power
    8372

    Default Re: Phero effectiveness on women - a article - use

    Creepy definelty the greeks were onto something the ratios for attraction to the opposite sex ive heard are as follows

    Females 0.6 - 0.7 hip to waist
    Males 1.0 - 1.1 hip to waist thats why guys who work out get more.

    = Alpha males are bigger - it really is very interesting.

    More tangent mathematics at work - another point is that for the rise to go from 0.62 up to 0.7 may over a couple of thousand years be explained from the increasing size and better health standards compared with ancient times. Ie women and men are getting bigger on average which means that those ratios change.

    www.ecorp.com.au

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

    Default Re: Phero effectiveness on women - a article - use

    Yes. Greek statues of bodies are way more beautiful than Roman ones for precisely the reason that the Romans did not know about phi. There might be 40-50 places where phi is measured on a Greek statue (all 20 fingers and toes to start with).

  27. #27
    Phero Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    241
    Rep Power
    7979

    Default Re: Phi; Kohl

    Well of course the so called \"Ratio of Beauty\" whitch is 1:1.618 is not only applicable to our faces. It was also applied to acoustics. The baffles of loudspeakers were designed such that the ratio of the length,width and height are all equal to 1:1.618 this gives them a very good sounding stereo. I think applying this ratio to pheros might have the same effect.

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

    Default Re: Phi; Kohl

    Thank you Ferro.

    Your idea about phi, first mentioned above has been an inspiration for me here lately. Check hit squad.

  29. #29
    Phero Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    241
    Rep Power
    7979

    Default Re: Phi; Kohl

    Well, its worth mentioning coz i am really curious about the definition of \"BEAUTY\" and then \"What makes things beautiful\"

    There is a study that says that the human mind is trained or conditioned to find order or symmetry in nature. So in a way, beauty is just order or symmetry. That is why if you look in a piece of mud for a very long time, it becomes beautiful to look at because your mind have already found symmetry in that piece of mud.

    You can try that at even the ugliest thing you can see. It just takes time.

  30. #30
    Doctor of Scentology DrSmellThis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    6,233
    Rep Power
    8665

    Default Re: Phi; Kohl

    Yes, and balance. More will come of this.

Page 1 of 3 1 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. HERE IT IS!!! 12 LONG PAGES OF HITS...OR LIES?
    By MOBLEYC57 in forum Pheromone Discussion
    Replies: 108
    Last Post: 11-16-2007, 05:43 PM
  2. Phero dilution and effectiveness
    By Johnny_Phero in forum Pheromone Discussion
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 01-26-2004, 03:24 PM
  3. (Re)Reopening Skin vs Hair vs Clothing case
    By TBiRD in forum Pheromone Discussion
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 03-03-2003, 09:00 PM
  4. Pheromone News, January, 2002
    By Bruce in forum Archives 1
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-23-2002, 07:43 AM
  5. what is the most effective phero for WOMEN?????
    By **DONOTDELETE** in forum Archives 2
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 09-28-2001, 02:36 AM

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
  •