Do copulins increase testosterone in females?

[jvkohl]

It is generally agreed that people will lie about sex; and that statistics can lie--but statistics typically do not lie about sex. Nor can statistics tell us anything about a particular individual\'s sexual response--to pheromones, or anything else. In other words, FTR knows her own response better than anyone else; if it doesn\'t fit the statistical analyses, fine. On the other hand, there have been enough pregnancies in women on the pill to show that the ovulatory increase in estrogen is sufficient to evoke the LH surge, which prompt release of the ovum. If estrogen levels rise but fall ever so slightly short of evoking the LH surge, one could expect that ofactory acuity and specificity to male pheromones would be enhanced--as this enhancement is believed to be caused by the increased estrogen levels of women--as compared to men. If estrogen levels are maintained at either high levels or low levels (less than 200) the LH surge is not likely to occur, but we don\'t know whether the higher levels correlate with increased libido in some women. We do know, statistically, that low levels correlate with \"hypoactive\" sexual desire from a study by Patricia Shreiner-Engle in the early 80\'s. However, she did not report this correlate; clearly seen in the graph of her data. We also know that the LH surge correlates with peak testosterone levels in women who are believed to be as testosterone driven as men, at ovulation. If humans were any other mammal, we could know for sure that maximum fertility is a part of maximum olfactory acuity and specificity and the only truly important factor in properly timed reproductive sexual behavior--since that\'s the way it works in every other mammal. Still, it seems likely that predicting such strong correlates in human females would provide a degree of insight into what might otherwise be considered totally unpredictable sexual behavior. Accordingly, just because we may not be able to predict FTR\'s response-cycle phase correlate, there is still good reason to enhance one\'s masculine pheromone signature, as it helps us reach out to those wanton ovulatory babes who might not want to think they are behaving like animals, but don\'t mind doing so--given the proper incentives.
-----------------------

(All of the above with tongue in cheek, of course.)

[**DONOTDELETE**]

JVK, if it\'s true that the pill renders a woman insensitive to pheromones, then that also means that so does Depo-Provera and Norplant. You\'ve just ruled out a huge portion of your targets for pheromones - I don\'t know exact numbers, but I\'m aquainted with a lot of women in an age range of from maybe 25-50 and we\'re all on one or another hormone-type birth control for various reasons, whether to even out irregular cycles, control pain, stop having periods, etc., never mind just to control fertility I argue so stubbornly because of that. Maybe it\'s just the women I know, because we all have to work, and just can\'t afford the wide mood swings, energy fluctuations, and inconvenience of periods and a natural cycle. (You know you can take the active pills in the pill pack continuously and not have a period at all. Or you can do Depo, and eventually msot women\'s periods will stop.) I\'m just saying, if you\'re gonna rule out all the women who are on hormone-based birth control of one sort or another, you almost may as well not use pheromones, because that\'s a huge portion of the fertile middle class population from first period well into perimenopause. Studies be damned, oodles and oodles of women are on hormone-based birth control and they\'re all just as boy crazy as they ever were and they\'re all having sex. We don\'t have sex if we don\'t feel like it, y\'all know that. So to my mind, what\'s happening in real life is not what\'s going on in the lab, if lab results indicate that birth control kills our ability to respond to men/pheromones. I guess we have a tendency to believe what we want to believe in the face of all other evidence, (I\'m proving that point as I go) so I hear people arguing, well, human females don\'t act like primate females because of social conditioning and inhibitions and etc. etc., but REALLY they\'re responding the way primate females would, so that\'s the hand to play to. I\'m not sure it\'s true. Granted it would make life a lot easier in some ways to believe that, but it doesn\'t seem to play out much in real life. Women\'s reasons for wanting sex are much more varied than because of response to hormone cycle, whether natural or superimposed by synthetics. And for sure any studies done re the pill when it first came out, you can pretty well disregard. Doctors don\'t prescribe that kind of pill any more, almost never. The side effects are way too high.

[xvs]

I realize the article I linked to is rather techical, but if you page through it you get to some tables and can see the results of the olfactory sensitivity tests. Also, the conclusions are interesting to read, even if you skim over the rest.

It did NOT say or show that women on the pill were unable to smell. It merely showed that they had a reduced sensitivity compared to women who were ovulating and not on the pill. And again, it only tested certain substances, not all of them.

So far as I know, no one has done a study comparing responses to known pheromones with VNO affinity such as androstadienone.

It could be that women on the pill have a lower sensitivity to some pheromones and a higher sensitivity to others. For example, I would predict that there might be a less positive reaction to androstenone, since that pheromone evokes a positive reaction mainly in ovulating women.

The upshot: without a lot more data we are theorizing (or, if you don\'t want to be charitable, speculating) about many of these things.

We don\'t know why the pill is associated with lower sex drive -- if it is the lowerd testosterone levels, does that in itself lower the sex drive, or does it reduce pheromone sensitivity which in turn lowers the sex drive, or both?

Interesting to think about, but I don\'t think anyone knows...

[**DONOTDELETE**]

I look forward to reading the article. I can\'t open it with the internet appliance I\'m using at home and will have to wait until Monday to access it on my work computer.I\'m an intellectual property secretary specializing in chemical/biopharm patents, so I read technical stuff all day. Hopefully, I\'ll be able to get through it. [img]/ubbthreads/images/icons/smile.gif[/img]Meanwhile, are you telling me the literature says categorically that the pill lowers libido in all women who take it? Does what you\'re reading along these lines differentiate between types of pills, how were the women for the studies selected, how current are the studies?I wish I could cite to this but I can\'t - do you remember studies wherein women were shown sexually stimulating materials while being hooked up to measuring devices and then were asked to report their arousal levels, and most of the women reported no arousal levels, when in fact and without a doubt, their bodies were aroused? Since our stuff\'s internal and we can\'t see it, half the time we don\'t even know how we feel, since we can\'t see the physical evidence, apparently.That makes everything women say in the lab about their sexuality suspect to me.Reports are extremely conflicting, too, about the effects of complete hysterectomy (ovaries and uterus) on women\'s sexuality. Some women lose their drive completely. Some have an entirely new lease on life and are horny like mad. If you can\'t get consistent data from physical complete castration, how could you expect to get anything meaningful when it\'s just a matter of tinkering with hormone levels? (the general \"you\" I mean, not you in particular).

[xxxPantero]

FTR, which pill are you on, specifically?

[xvs]

FTR:

Of course the article doesn\'t say that contraceptive pills lower libido in every single woman who takes them. Just that there have been studies (one of which they cite) which showed that it did have a pronounced libido lowering effect.

Also, the results on testosterone levels and on olfactory sensitivity appear to be objective.

Just read it tomorrow and then you can comment!

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Pantero, I take Ortho-Novum. Why? (It\'s a fairly strong pill.)

[Watcher]

Im sure vast differences will come up not everyone is bilogically the same, sure generalisations can be made, i wonder what FTR would have been like if she had or has been off the pill at any point. Maybe even more sensitive or maybe she is less sensitive off the pill than on. She may have high T levels for instance which throw that whack out of balance or she might have a very highly developed sense of androgen detcetion..

[jvkohl]

A study to be published soon (it\'s overdue) showed that menstrual cycle phase didn\'t make any difference in ratings associated with pheromones. Thus it appears to fly in the face of other data, but seems to agree with FTR\'s writings. I have been acused of presenting information that is \"ahead of the data.\" She\'s doing it, too! Must wait to assess the article\'s worth, before commenting further.

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Hey, the truth always prevails.

That\'s cool, can\'t wait to see the study.

[ccbythesea]

Just thought I\'d throw my two cents worth in here as a non-ovulating woman. My ovaries \"died\" about 12 years ago as a direct result of a non-related medical problem. I don\'t menstruate and I don\'t ovulate but I sure do get horny and I love having sex. Everything is in perfect working order too!! Also, the pheromones I wear (primarily PI/w & PCC) enhance/heighten my horniness as well as evoke very obviously phero-induced reactions in people around me. Glad I never read any of these studies....maybe they would\'ve had some sort of negative influence on my libido....NOT.
CC

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Thanks for the backup, CC.

[Watcher]

I think the body has a backup system, plus its human nature to constantly be ready for sex, something about our evolution and the fact we have taken sex to a 24 hour a day persuit.