Phero dilution and effectiveness

[Johnny_Phero]

I\'ve been reading up on diluting some of the more concentrated pheromone products (ie. NPA) via mixing w/ less

concentrated products and/or \"cutting\" them w/ grain alcohol or lotion and seem to be finding mixed opinions on

the matter. Many peeps seem to take the stance that more surface area covered (lower mg mones/in.^2 of skin) yields

better results due to greater dispersion (also allows for more total mg applied w/o OD).
The opposing viewpoint

to this (which is a possible explanation of better/worse rxns to NPA compared to TE) is that a certain concentration

of a pheromone (in this case -none + secret ingredients) must be achieved to obtain optimal results. I\'ve found

numerous threads specifically discussing PPA\'s \"magic\" concentration of .015% -none, which seems to

strengthen this latter argument.

Obviously, a topic such as this is inherently subjective, but I was just hoping

to get some of your most recent opinions on the matter.

Thanks.

[bundyburger]

I still find myself having trouble with PI and NPA concentrations. Mainly in trying to not put too much on.
Even

when using less than half a drop of PI I have had people screwing their noses up at the smell.
Now whenever I use

PI I\'ll put a drop into the bathroom basin and wipe my finger through it to get a smaller amount. That swipe of

on my finger then gets rubbed around a large area around my neck chest and so on (Still experimenting).

I have

had successful applications with different techniques, but all containing -none have been inconsistent. I\'m

looking for a small amount and technique that can be used everytime without getting adverse reactions

sometimes.

So in answer to your post, I tend to go with small amount over large surface area. This is where

diluting would come in handy. This works great with AE/m (which dilutes fine enough for me with just water).

[img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[CptKipling]

</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
I\'ve found numerous threads specifically

discussing PPA\'s \"magic\" concentration of .015% -none, which seems to strengthen this latter argument.



<hr /></blockquote><font class=\"post\">

But who posted it?

[Johnny_Phero]

</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
</font><blockquote><font

class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
I\'ve found numerous threads specifically discussing PPA\'s \"magic\"

concentration of .015% -none, which seems to strengthen this latter argument.

<hr /></blockquote><font

class=\"post\">

But who posted it?

<hr /></blockquote><font class=\"post\">

Good point.....I suppose

they were probably newbies (like myself). I\'d still like to hear some opinions as to the validity (or lack there

of) of such arguments.

[CptKipling]

I

wasn\'t really newbie bashing.

iirc most of the talk about PPA was during the &lt;irony&gt;first coming of the

wonder mix PAN&lt;/irony&gt;, and that was mostly hot air. I\'m not doubting that PPA or even PAN work well,

I\'m just saying that there was a lot of exaggeration and blowing of self-trumpets(tm).

[belgareth]

There\'s no magic concentration. There is a level that will work well for you. Too little will not get reactions

and too much will repel. You know you have too much on if you are getting reactions from clear across the room. If

it is spread over a large area, the dispersal will be better and less likely to cause on OD.

Many of us have

found that less is definately better.