BBC article, Pill changes women's taste in men

[Nutt]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/2677697.stm
suggest that it may actually make women less sensitive to pheros. also says that women on the pill tend to prefer macho type males.

Thought you guys would appreciate it [img]/ubbthreads/images/icons/laugh.gif[/img]

[Whitehall]

That seems to contradict previous studies where women on the pill preferred men with less testosterone presuming them to be better husband material.

Women who were ovulating (not on pill) tended to go for the more masculine types.

The part about women on the pill have less sensitivity to pheromones is also understood. Ovulation is the time of peak positive sensitivity.

At least that\'s my memory and it seems to fit with other parts of the theory.

[**DONOTDELETE**]

JVK posted something saying it DOES NOT matter whether the woman\'s on the pill or not, her sensitivity to pheromones remains the same.

The studies I\'ve read regarding men with less testosterone suggest that men who have children have less testosterone than single men or men who have wives but no children, and posits they may therefore be better husbands because of less testosteroney need to stray/fight/etc. I\'ve never seen anything suggesting women prefer men with less testosterone.

[Whitehall]

\"I\'ve never seen anything suggesting women prefer men with less testosterone.\"

Then you haven\'t seen any feminist literature....

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Oh for god\'s sake.

Whitehall, honey, find a new song ...

[Whitehall]

I\'ve been scarred for life - and I\'m still arguing with one at home.

Frankly, it is a well-taken point. Feminists have often referred to \"testosterone poisoning\" as a plague. Some women DO have an adversion to men with high testosterone. It is even a factor in politics.

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Women have an aversion to men who are assholes, just like men have an aversion to women who are bitches. It\'s got nothing to do with feminism or testosterone, as far as I can tell.

[Lucky]

Roll, Red!

[Elana]

That\'s our girl [img]/ubbthreads/images/icons/smile.gif[/img]

[drchaos]

What women may think about a guy in the non-sexual context (w.r.t \"testosterone poisoning\") may be quite different than looking for a mate or root.

Think about the raging [bad word] who pisses *almost* everybody off---except that one hot girl who is in lurrrv. That story is timelessly old.

[jvkohl]

http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_741371.html?menu=
The above link is to a similar article; no mention of pheromones. FTRH is correct; I mentioned that one study showed no effect of the pill, and I was quite surprised at their findings. All other studies (and now this one) strongly suggest that the pill eliminates the cyclic peak in olfactory acuity and specificity to male pheromones. Thus, the women tend to need the additional pheromonal stimuli from the high testosterone macho men. Could probably get the same effect via pheromone enhanced fragrances like SOE.

[druid]

I thought the pill messed with a womans hormone levels to trick her body into thinking it is pregenant?? jkohl -- Didn\'t you say that hormone levels affect mones? Then maybe the pill does affect mones/mones perception?

[jvkohl]

The latest information supports the tentative fact that women who take oral contraceptives (and trick their body into thinking they\'re pregnant) require more pheromonal stimulation (i.e., from men who have higher testosterone levels, and therefore produce a more masculine pheromone signature.) The data is impossible to interpret so far, since the paper isn\'t available, but the context seems correct. The higher estrogen levels associated with taking the pill eliminate a cyclic surge in luteinizing hormone that is accompanied by peak sensitivity to musky male body odor. Without this peak sensitivity, it appears that women need a more macho pheromone signature to punch their sexual buttons.

[Watcher]

So this could support why women remain single and only mate with those alpha high testostrone level males via their higher pheromone levels (a broad based change in western society), could indicate womens move to be more active and male like in society.
Long term impacts would be more male offspring with higher testostrone levels and more aggressive traits - the rise in ADHD etc in recent times could be attributeable to this (high test levels - more active and hyperactive in some cases)
Thats why those of us with synthetic pheromones at 50+ times normal levels get such a response by women even on the pill, its making men overcome the pill to get women pregant (even the pill is only 99% effective)
This has interesting social impacts and also explains a fall in reproduction rates in western society also explains more aggressive male like behaviour by women in high powered male jobs. (CEOs etc which require a bastard logical approach)

Any one wanna comment, good work jkohl. Hope you dont mind me running with youre post there. thought id apply some additional thinking to it.

[jvkohl]

Watcher,
Some good speculation on your part, but that\'s all it will remain. Researchers are not yet ready to look at all the implications for societal effects; most are still getting comfortable with the concept of human pheromones. In this regard, a colleague sent me a message today announcing publication of research showing that male axillary secretions affect hormone levels and mood in women. This is landmark stuff; same team failed to get the results in 1990, due to failure to control for menstrual cycle phase, but all of us have learned a lot since then. The article at the following URL
http://www.biolreprod.org/cgi/rapidpdf/biolreprod.102.008268v1
also is a good review of what is known to date. Note, however, that little speculation is offerred, despite the fact that these researchers know very well what their results mean to studies of human behavior. It will be interesting to see the media take on this, so everyone be sure to watch for it, and let Forum members know when it appears. For now, Forum members have advance information, which makes it nice to say \"I knew that\" when the results trickle down to the masses.

[nonscents]

Thanks for the excellent link, JVK!

The following quotation from the article struck me:

<font color=purple>Studies by Jacob and McClintock (5) utilized putative “human pheromones” reported to “stimulate the
(human) vomeronasal organ” (40, 41; however, see 42 for a review of experimental evidence for and against the existence of a functional, human VNO). These compounds are steroids, but only one, viz., &amp;#8710;4,16-
androstadienone, has been reported in the axillae, and then in picomolar quantities (38), which are far lower
than the levels used by Jacob and McClintock (~ 9 nanomoles per recipient; ref. 5); the other compound, estra-
1,3,5(10)tetraen-3-yl acetate, is a synthetic compound, never reported in the axillae</font color=purple>[my emphasis].

Only A1 has been found in armpits? I know copulins were found in vaginal secretions, but what about rone, none and nol?