Known pheromones

[pieroilfiero]

So far, what i am

seeing in the love-scent product, is that there are 4 known pheromones

Androstenone / Rone / Nol / copulins

Is

all the variety of product a different concentration or mix of those 4, or are there other \"hidden\" pheros that

don\'t get their names written on the label? *curious*

[cuddlebear]

Well, it\'s a

litle more complex than that ... WAGG contains mones but from what I understand none of the major 4 you listed ...

Some of the formulas have \"secret ingredients\" ... And you didn\'t mention A1 or Beta-Nol ... However, the

four you mentioned are the most often used mones ... read up on each product that interests you to find out about

its mone composition.

[Mtnjim]

There are 100+ (112 I

think) known human ~mones. The ones listed are the commercially available ones. Some of the others, the researchers

have no idea what they do.

[einstein]

That number seems

a little low to me. David Berliner has patents on about 5 different groups of steroids that could affect \"human

hypothalimic function\". He seems to lists about 100 compunds in each one.
He doesn\'t give specific effects

for them, although he does holds patents for using steroids to relieve pain and PMS. He mentions A1 a lot in the

PMS patent.

[jvkohl]

To date, only -nol has

been linked to hormonal changes in women, and copulins as well as a progesteronic pheromone have been linked to

hormonal changes in men. Other steroid hormone derivitives appear to register in the hypothalmus of men differently

than in women, which may someday link the different response to hormones and behavioral differences. Bottom line:

the answer to the number of known pheromones pheromones depends on what you want to call a pheromone.

[CptKipling]

...and copulins

is not one pheromone, it\'s a group of pheromones iirc.

[jvkohl]

Copulins (the plural)

signifies a group of chemicals. But this group of chemicals is only effective as a group--and then only in the

ovulatory mix. Since only the ovulatory mix of copulins is effective in raising luteinzing hormone and testosterone

levels in men, \"copulins\" typically refers to one pheromone in the context of other pheromones, like -nol, which

raises luteinizing hormone in women, or when referring to other possible pheromones link -rone and -none. I\'ll

bet this is confusing to many people, but especially to those who speak English as a second language.

[fran1]

JVK MASter thank for

the explanation.

[CptKipling]

</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
Copulins (the plural) signifies a group of

chemicals. But this group of chemicals is only effective as a group--and then only in the ovulatory mix. Since only

the ovulatory mix of copulins is effective in raising luteinzing hormone and testosterone levels in men,

\"copulins\" typically refers to one pheromone in the context of other pheromones, like -nol, which raises

luteinizing hormone in women, or when referring to other possible pheromones link -rone and -none. I\'ll bet this

is confusing to many people, but especially to those who speak English as a second language.

<hr

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

I see, so (as a crude example) one or two of the ingredients from EW

splashed on will not work to create a hormone change. But, can these individual ingredients create a reaction from

association and conditioning?

[jvkohl]

One or two of the

copulin chemicals are not likely to elicit the male hormone response, because it is the ovulatory phase combination

that conditions the male hormone response. However, women respond to less complex combinations of chemicals, like

-rone or -nol because these are merely signals of testosterone levels (reproductive fitness). Reproductive fitness

in men is tonic because testosterone levels do not fluctuate much during any given month. Since reproductive fitness

is cyclical in women, men are less likely than women to respond to individual chemicals. It takes the right

(ovulatory) combination to change hormone levels in men, otherwise male mammals, including men would have no

chemical cues to tell when the female is most likely to get pregnant. It was generally believed that men lost this

ability to sniff out fertility in women, until very recently when Dev Singh and Matt Bronstad showed that men prefer

the scent of ovulatory women. But study results have not really made it into the mainstream of knowledge about

properly timed reproductive sexual behavior in humans. This is not surprising since sniffing out fertility will

almost undoubtedly remain okay for other mammals, but not given much consideration by people who prefer to think we

don\'t respond to such cues. It\'s late, did I answer your question?

[CptKipling]

</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
It\'s late, did I answer your question?

<hr

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

Yes, thanks [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[CJ01]

</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
To date, only -nol has been linked to hormonal

changes in women, and copulins as well as a progesteronic pheromone have been linked to hormonal changes in men.



<hr /></blockquote><font class=\"post\"> JVK, copulins do raise testosterone levels in women too

[img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img] A good number of female users have noticed this effect on

themselves. When EW first came out most of us who tried it ended up getting horny one way or another. And I have

noticed it in other women when I use copulins by the reactions I get from them.

</font><blockquote><font

class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
Since only the ovulatory mix of copulins is effective in raising luteinzing

hormone and testosterone levels in men

<hr /></blockquote><font class=\"post\"> thanks for confirming my own

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


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

[jvkohl]

It would not be

appropriate for me to say copulins increase testosterone levels in women, based upon self reports of increased

libido. There are research results to show the effect on testosterone levels in men, by actually measuring hormone

levels. Other research reports show that the pheromones of women may either advance or retard ovulation, and this is

presumably via an effect on luteinizing hormone (LH) and follicle stimulating hormone. However, it is more

difficult to get from a LH change to testosterone in women than it is to get (i.e., directly) from LH to

testosterone level changes in men. Simply put, women are more complicated--but then most of us know that.

[bjf]

</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
It would not be appropriate for me to say copulins

increase testosterone levels in women, based upon self reports of increased libido. There are research results to

show the effect on testosterone levels in men, by actually measuring hormone levels. Other research reports show

that the pheromones of women may either advance or retard ovulation, and this is presumably via an effect on

luteinizing hormone (LH) and follicle stimulating hormone. However, it is more difficult to get from a LH change to

testosterone in women than it is to get (i.e., directly) from LH to testosterone level changes in men. Simply put,

women are more complicated--but then most of us know that.

<hr /></blockquote><font

class=\"post\">

Please specify what pheromone(s) have been indicated to retard ovulation. I have read (and

posted) a study that indicated Nol suppresses it, but I am guessing a study like that is not what you are referring

to, based upon your well-known stance on Nol.

[CJ01]

JVK,I see what you´re

saying [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] My comment was not based on actual lab tests of course

just reports from other female users and observations I have made.

[bjf]

Is the feeling of

\"horniness\" only associated with testosterone increases, or would an LH spike directly induce such a conscious

feeling as well?

Could A-1 be one of the pheromones that suppresses LH spikes?

[jvkohl]

<hr

/></blockquote><font class=\"post\">
Please specify what pheromone(s) have been indicated to retard ovulation. I

have read (and posted) a study that indicated Nol suppresses it, but I am guessing a study like that is not what you

are referring to, based upon your well-known stance on Nol.

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

I must

have missed your post; please direct me to it. It was one of Martha McClintock\'s studies--from recall, probably

with Suma Jacob, and most likely the one in 1998. The study showed that the -unspecified- pheromones of females

altered menstrual cycle phase by either advancing or retarding it. The only -nol studies I\'ve seen attest to

it\'s ability to increase LH, which would advance the onset of ovulation. This is tricky, but first LH/FSH ratios

increase, then estrogen levels increase and prompt an ovulatory surge of LH and testosterone.

[jvkohl]

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

Is the feeling of \"horniness\" only associated

with testosterone increases, or would an LH spike directly induce such a conscious feeling as well?

<hr

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

Increased horniness is typically associated with the LH
and testosterone

increase--Martha McClintock was a co-author of a recent article, which i think is cited in my April update to my

website (which has not yet been posted to the site). The author\'s define a \"sexual\" phase of the menstrual

cycle--pretty bold stuff, but not all the endocrine details are in the article, since much of it is known to the

endocrinology folk.

So far as conscious perception goes, at best a woman would probably only be mildly aware

that she was more interested in \"getting laid\" during the ovulatory/sexual phase of the cycle--unless she

typically charts her cycle to correlate the endocrinology with her behavior--and even then only if she is not taking

oral contraceptives.

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

Could A-1 be one of the

pheromones that suppresses LH spikes?


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

I haven\'t seen anything

that would suggest this. Seems more likely that the whatever is suppressing LH (if it comes from other women) is of

estrogenic origin. This would be more characteristic of mammalian neuroendocrine function. When there are many

fertile (i.e., estrogenized) females in the vicinity, ovulation is suppressed in many of the females. The pheromones

\"tell\" the females that they\'re wasting effort on ovulation, since there probably aren\'t enough males in

the vicinity to fertilize all of them.

[jvkohl]

BTF, here\'s the

citation info--might even have come from the post I asked you about.

Further evidence of chemical signalling in

humans comes from work by Martha McClintock: armpit swabs taken from donor women at a certain phase in their

menstrual cycle and wiped on the upper lip of recipient women can advance or retard menstruation in the recipients

depending upon the phase of the donor (Stern &amp; McClintock, Nature (1998) 392, 177-179)

[bjf]

</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
BTF, here\'s the citation info--might even have

come from the post I asked you about.

Further evidence of chemical signalling in humans comes from work by Martha

McClintock: armpit swabs taken from donor women at a certain phase in their menstrual cycle and wiped on the upper

lip of recipient women can advance or retard menstruation in the recipients depending upon the phase of the donor

(Stern &amp; McClintock, Nature (1998) 392, 177-179)



<hr /></blockquote><font

class=\"post\">

Hmmm...was wondering if it was the same as the \"dorm study\" and I guess it was.

Here is

the study I was referring to that spoke of Nol retarding LH releases.....it was posted in the women\'s forum, I

was wondering if Nol did produce LH spikes, whether the use of Nol would increase their own natural phero output or

something like the ovulatory copulin mix you recently spoke of.

However, the thread didn\'t do much to solving

that riddle, but here is the study....I believe I have seen one other one with the same results as well, but

didn\'t appear as

reliable.

http://chemse.oupjournals.org/cgi/co

ntent/full/25/4/465

[jvkohl]

Preti and Wysocki et

al showed the effect of men\'s axillary secretions on LH and mood in women. So it may be that the particular

combination of pheromones from men advances ovulation by increasing LH pulse frequency, while pheromones from women

typically retard LH pulse frequency (thus retarding ovulation). I don\'t think this will be clarified anytime

soon.

[bjf]

</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
Preti and Wysocki et al showed the effect of

men\'s axillary secretions on LH and mood in women. So it may be that the particular combination of pheromones

from men advances ovulation by increasing LH pulse frequency, while pheromones from women typically retard LH pulse

frequency (thus retarding ovulation). I don\'t think this will be clarified anytime soon.

<hr

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

Is this the study that the development of your product was based on?

[jvkohl]

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

Is this the study that the development of your

product was based on?

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

The SOE for men product was introduced 1-2

years prior to
their report. However, their results were predictable given my mammalian model. This, despite Preti

and Wysocki\'s 1990 unpublished finding that their was no change in LH. I discussed this with them both at a

AChemS conference in the mid 90\'s, and they were already aware that the problem in attempting to find an LH

change was to control for the menstrual cycle variation, which they subsequently did. The influence of pheromones on

mood was an unexpected finding for me. It was easy to speculate about the mood change, but kudos to Preti and

Wysocki for documenting both the LH and the mood change.

I\'m still somewhat surprised that these findings,

combined with circa 2001 findings that androstenol influences LH in women, did not lead to dramatic increases in SOE

product sales. Combined with reports of SOE effectiveness, the biological support from recent studies should have

attracted the attention of most pheromone-enhanced product users. It\'s nice to see that you (bjf) are paying

attention. It may be a few more years before the complete rationale for also using androsterone in SOE becomes

widely known, but when you do read about the link between androsterone and sexual orientation, remember that SOE

contained androsterone from the start.

[bjf]

JVK:

Since you are

around the forum again, I figure I should get your opinion now on this. You said you recently co-authored a study

with Martha McClintock. I was wondering if I could get your opinion on some of her and others research regarding

smell and immunotype:



Smell and mate choice

Recent work from Martha McClintock\'s lab in Chicago shows

that women are able to detect minute differences in male immunotype by smell (Jacob et al., 2002). Immunotype is

conferred by HLA alleles, the genes that confer immunity in humans (the equivalent of MHC in animals), and

determines our individual smell. We tend to prefer smell of people who have different HLA alleles to our own. This

would mean the offspring of such a match would confer immune advantage - more different HLA alleles would be passed

on to the kids giving them a greater degree of immunity. We tend to be repelled by people whose immunotype (HLA

alleles) is similar to our own. It looks like we choose our partner on the basis of smell (Wedekind et al., 1997) -

well it would be one factor anyway. So, why do we spend so much time, and money, disguising it? Actually, we can

probably detect the HLA-related smell in spite of our best attempts to cover it up!

human leukocyte

antigen


http://www.findarticles.

com/cf_0/m1134/n7_v107/21084296/print.jhtml

http

://www.nature.com/nsu/020114/020114-13.html

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/que

ry.fcgi?holding=npg&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;db=PubMed &amp;list_uids=11799397&amp;dopt=Abstract

http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/links/

doi/10.1111/j.1399-0039.2004.00146.x/abs/

http://www.

ihwg.org/components/newallr.htm

http://www.abc.net.au/news/scitech/2002/01/item20020121101501_1.htm

http://www.nature.com/nsu/010308/010308-10.html

[jvkohl]

</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
JVK:
You said you recently co-authored a study

with Martha McClintock.

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

Sorry you got the wrong impression, I have

never co-authored with Martha.

</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
I was wondering if

I could get your opinion on some of her and others research regarding smell and immunotype:

<hr

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

All the work to date shows that we maintain the same ability that tracking

dogs use to sniff out differences in genetic diversity (i.e., tissue type). It would be difficult to explain why the

ability is maintained, unless we still use it--as many others have suggested, since Carole Ober first reported this

at a 1993 genetics conference (and published 4 years later). However, this is not an ability we need to be trained

to use. If you want to train an animal to use such an ability, humans aren\'t the best choice. The first problem

would likely be that whomever you were trying to train wouldn\'t think/believe they had the ability in the first

place. Humans are such simple creatures in this regard. For example, most humans think that visual input is more

important to sexual development than is olfactory input. Silly people! They should be trained to read the Pheromone

Forum if only for educational purposes. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

[bjf]

</font><blockquote><font class=\"small\">Quote:</font><hr />
It would be difficult to explain why the ability

is maintained, unless we still use it--as many others have suggested, since Carole Ober first reported this at a

1993 genetics conference (and published 4 years later).

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

From your

own work:

In humans, female olfactory preferences also seem to induce disassortative mating for components of the

major histocompatibility complex (MHC) as is observed in other mammals [100]. In other words, olfactory cues may be

able to reflect parts of an individual\'s genome, and body odor seems to influence female mate choice in order to

find a partner who possesses fitting MHC-dependent immune system components. Simply put, ovulatory women seem to

prefer the scent of genetic diversity. Indeed, both women who are not taking oral contraceptives, and men rate

similar genetically determined odors as less attractive than dissimilar genetically determined odors. Thus, not only

are men and women able to distinguish among genetically distinct, self versus non-self odors, they prefer the scent

of non-self (i.e., genetic diversity) [101]. Men and women with shared markers of genetic diversity also select

perfumes that may amplify body odor that is linked to their genetic diversity



web page


Do you (still) subscribe to the

theory?

[jvkohl]

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

Do you (still) subscribe to the theory?

<hr

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

Yes, but it\'s more biological fact than theory. Still, I suspect you

have read about the study reporting that women
liked the smell of their father best. Martha commented to
a

sexology list about the report on that one. The mass media interpretation was a somewhat typical

misrepresentation.

Nice to see you have read my NEL review; it\'s not an easy read for most people.

[bjf]

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

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

Do you (still) subscribe to the theory?

<hr /></blockquote><font

class=\"post\">

Yes, but it\'s more biological fact than theory. Still, I suspect you have read about the

study reporting that women
liked the smell of their father best. Martha commented to
a sexology list about the

report on that one. The mass media interpretation was a somewhat typical misrepresentation.

Nice to see you have

read my NEL review; it\'s not an easy read for most people.



<hr /></blockquote><font

class=\"post\">

Right, I actually was going to say that I guess it was a case of media misrepresentation. Just

because they conciously like certain smells better does not mean it has any affect on sexual behavior or biology,

but I wonder if it is a regular subconcious factor.

The NEL reading isn\'t that hard, easier then some of your

older posts (you are getting alot better [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]).

Do you think

metabolites of LH could act as a pheromone, or is that hormone not sex specific enough to relay any pertinent

information that humans would find worth picking up?

[jvkohl]

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

Do you think metabolites of LH could act as a

pheromone, or is that hormone not sex specific enough to relay any pertinent information that humans would find

worth picking up?

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

The LH change (increase) translates to increased

testosterone (and its metabolites in men), and to increased estrogen (and its metabolites in women). But in women,

the increased estrogen (due to LH) causes LH to surge at ovulation which leads to increased testosterone in women.

The whole scenario is ridiculously complex, since LH levels are regulated by gonadotropin releasing hormone pulse

frequency, and feedback mechanisms that influence pituitary and hypothalamic hormone secretion, as well as just

about everything else.

Bottom line: LH is part of the process by which pheromone production changes; it is not a

pheromone and neither are its metabolites--so far as is currently known.