I never attacked the use of pheromones. I’m using them myself. I opened a theoretical discussion about if and when their use might be unethical.
In other news, you’ve got issues.
Now now, lets not loose civility.
Perhaps excessive hygiene is unethical, or at least anti-human.
Sure, people smell “better”* (or at least less like humans)… but they sure don’t get along better socially.
The smell of the average American is sort of the visual equivalent of IBM’s old blue suit. Standardization increases the flow of business, perhaps, by taking the focus off of the “human” you are dealing with, but it does seem to add a “machine element” to things. More business, but less enjoyment doing it, perhaps. (it may also cause us to disconnect from the purpose of why we’re doing business with each other in the first place – which is to basically help ourselves by helping others)
Heck, there’s even communication breakdowns here that might not occur if we shared more of an olfactory reality between us all.
Maybe this starts somehow with the story of our birth. The good ol’ sperm and egg, smelling each other. The chemical sense is one that each of our more than 100 trillion cells has. It is our most primordial sense, and perhaps our most important. Maybe we our stabbing ourselves in the back by excessively washing off our natural social magic on a daily (and sometimes twice or thrice daily) basis. By removing the “chemical braille” that is inherent in our natures, and oh so important for us to gel together happily.
- The French, Spanish and Germans seem to disagree with Americans on this point. Some cultures tend to make fun of Americans, saying they smell of barbershops. There do seem to be far more lonely people, people excluded socially, in highly hygienic America than in the other the countries that poke fun of us. I’d love to look at hard stats on this.
Subliminals don’t work. Those subliminal tapes and stuff that are sold for self-help… don’t work. Tests have shown this.
I was referring to other things. Tests have shown that there’s a big difference in response on web pages when the purchase button says “buy now” vs “add to cart”. Apparently “add to cart” works much better, getting more sales. The words both mean the same thing logically, but the emotional response seems different, and is certainly below the conscious level of awareness.
Interesting thoughts. I hadn’t considered that perspective very deeply. I could see your natural pheromones being advantageous or disadvantageous depending on a lot of factors, such as your affect. For example, I used to work with animals, and I’m strongly inclined to believe that they’re consciously aware of the smell of fear and react negatively to it. While we don’t perceive that on a conscious level, I’d be surprised if it didn’t affect us in a similar way. In such a case, extra bathing would probably be beneficial.
I’d be very curious to see the results of a study based on that logic. Three communes, one with once-a-day bathing, one with every other day and one with weekly and monitor their perceptions of each other and frequency of interpersonal conflict, for example.
Also, I envy your writing skills. 
Subliminal perception - Scientific studies & research on subliminal messages.
There’s conflicting evidence about whether subliminals have any effect. I personally don’t buy into the self-help culture in general, but based on the research I wouldn’t dismiss subliminals so lightly.
I understand what you mean. I wasn’t strictly referring to subliminals, but meant to use it as an example of the fact that a lot of people are displeased by the idea of being manipulated by marketing at a level that may be beneath their perception. I realize that I’m being an idealist, but sometimes I wish that marketing was more standardized with respect to that type of factor. It’d be a lot more drab and boring, but the best quality product would be more likely to be successful.
Pheromones aren’t like using PT-141, you still have choices.
That style of writing is called suggestive selective word usage.
Also known as Neuro linguistic programming.
Once you learn it, kinda hard to shut off.
PT-141 is dead is it not?
Many of the really obvious, sort of “pop” examples of subliminal don’t do much of anything. i.e., the “flashes” of Coke bottles during movies and whatnot. All that caused was hysteria when it was revealed consciously, and subsequently congressional “action”.
However, just as certainly as even the beating of our hearts and basic operating of our body are even subliminal to us (and all subliminal means is BELOW our awareness, btw, it’s not some magical term), there are all kinds of subliminal data that do influence us without our conscious interaction.
First, priming experiments. Just like “priming” a wall with a certain type of neutral colored paint, helps a second coat better cling, this happens with the mind, too. Expose it to one thing, and it takes better to another.
Specifically as it applies to subliminals as we typically think of them (“flashes” of informations), experiments using visual flashes of people’s faces prime people to better accept or reject certain types of subsequent conscious mind suggestions.
Second, context “subliminals”. Cues. These are things that are out in the open that add to the congruency (or lack thereof) of a certain picture.
This is like (as in an extreme example) Bernie Madoff driving a fancy car, or being a member of NASDAQ. Now that’s quite an investment just to provide a cue, but that’s what this man actually did. He was a very advanced con.
Or rather, his skill were all social in nature, his social muscles overdeveloped, yet he had nothing to back up his words. (people tend to a mix of social ability and actual ability to deliver upon statements and promises; that’s what I’m almost socially retarded at times – I’m too busy actually developing things to be able focus too much on describing what I’m doing to outsiders. Thus, why I prefer reps to be here for social functions, so I actually do what I consider my real work to be.)
Third, take even things as “meaningless” (and thus, less than conscious to us) as symmetry of design. You’d figure that, except for designers, this might be as important for the general populace as other pieces of data. Yet our mind prefer certain types of symmetry, whether or not we consciously appreciate that symmetry.
Think of the experiments done with facial symmetry, especially the ones done with photo manipulation where both photos looked almost exactly the same on a conscious level to subjects. Despite lack of conscious awareness, people tended to choose the face that was, in fact, a few microns more symmetrical. That’s proof positive that little things do matter.
So as much as popular culture examples of subliminals don’t work, there’s a whole set of other data and types of data that we are, in fact, influenced by. It’s just structured a bit differently than the “flash” type of subliminals that scared us in the 50s. Structure matters.
Here’s a lab manual for Cornell univeristy to help students explore the reality (and lack thereof) of certain kinds of subliminal persuasion:
Subliminal Perception Manual
How about that the Muzakyou find everywhere?
Muzak: A Brief History of Elevator Music
Muzak is our daily dose of a well designed subliminal messaging. Audio architecture that is part of a congruent “subliminal branding approach”.
Call them up and listen closely to honest they’ll become with you privately, when you mention hot trigger words like “satellite radio” (as in, “I’m just calling before I buy a XM radio for my shop”. They don’t dare write their stats online anymore it seems (too afraid of bloggers, maybe?), but they’re definitely studied their deliberate attempts at less than conscious influence.
It’s not just ad free music. It’s designed to create a certain result. This may have even been one of the companies involved in testing those results with functional MRI technology. (like we’re working on in order to independently validate some of our own discoveries)
Subliminal advertising leaves its mark on the brain | Science Blog
See, you know that “subliminals” – if you consider it to be any information is simply below the level of conscious awareness – do work. 
(sorry, I just jumped into this a little late. It was a “scope error” on my part. I didn’t realize you meant only subliminal tapes were disproven. Certainly, though, are are cues that are useful in such tapes, as was as actual entrainment technology)
Nicely put Harris.
This is why I depend so heavily on the disciplines from ethology to observe pheromonal effects. i.e, listening to the behavior, watching the reality of it, moreso than listening the specific content from the mouth. ala Desmond Morris’ Manwatching.
Acknowledging and integrating reality, despite marketing or our most fantasy based hopes, is how actual growth occurs. This is why my work in the pheromone field has caused growth and moved things forward the past 6 years, whereas everybody else is caught back in the middle ages.
I’ll tell you what’s unethical… While they’re busy scamming you, manipulating your hopes and fears – selling you fake aphrodisiacs, fake or crap copulins (rancid salad dressing), etc. – they don’t do any actual damn work beyond operating the cash register. They eat phoney baloney sandwiches for lunch, and brush their teeth with the secret ingredient Fraudlin. (the mythical toothpaste ingredient behind Crelm from Monty Python)
On the other hand, I suspended my hopes and fears, and tried my best to take an actual look at what was going on with these often lied about molecules. As I started in this as an impartial skeptic about 10 or 11 years ago, I didn’t care what I found, good or bad.
In fact, I was actually biased against the stuff, if anything. Thinking back, I had always made fun of pheromones and the beyond incredulous advertising done for them. However, Erox’s efforts with the incessant radio ads (and availability at Macy’s) were able to lure me into at least trying the stuff. (and eventually understanding that they didn’t know at that time what their own molecules really did)
As I’ve discovered, too many assumptions were made, even by academics, about what these molecules actually do. Even the minds of academics were “in the gutter”. Many studies lacked proper dosing data (remember repeatability guys!), and as they looked at everything through a sex filter, they missed the reality of many molecules entirely. If you’re out prowling for sex, you’re not going the to notice the kitten in the box on the way to the bar.
As some modern studies show, lust blocks rational thought, even amongst the academic types. Harvard nerds have as much trouble putting a condom on in the heat of the moment, as anybody else does. These researchers were just sex-crazy, which is why the whole field was held in stasis for so long.
Yet it’s always a rational, reality based approach that moves anything forward. It is ultimately by placing our own biases aside, and embracing reality (good or bad), that we actually learn a thing or two. That we actually get useful data from. It is then (notice that this implies a sequence) with that reality based data, by working with realities that we do find, that we can then and only then help actualize our ideals and fantasies in an actual, tangible way. Reality is your friend when you bother to work with it.
I’ve said it so many times, it hurts. R&D first, R&D first. Don’t become too attached to anything, just keep on’ workin’ till you find something useful. Just like Edison, you have to create the damn lightbulb before you call it a lightbulb and light up the world. (of course, now in the days of the internet, we had the unprecedented opportunity to “crowd source” elements of reality exploration and R&D; modern structures for modern times)
Anyway, in terms of ethics of using real pheromones… I think perhaps that replacing what pheromones lose with our hygiene processes (showering every day, etc) is completely and totally ethical. Beyond that, with pheromones used to augment, well that’s in the same realm as women using makeup, or men buying a “sexy” suit or car.
Just made a post on that a minute ago.
Here is the post permalink -
menopause mone mix help - #4 by Domnk (menopause mone mix help - #4 by Domnk)
I just read of another aphrodisiac that had been approved recently by the FDA, but didn’t remember the name. Thought this was it.
pt was discontinued in '08
Oh, is there one now beyond 141 now? That’s exciting! Shoot me over a link.
You know – It’s very difficult for someone to develop one directly, without jumping the gun over research and going directly to fantasy-hype land. For whatever reason, people’s conscious minds just shut off, and reasonable behavior goes out the window when it comes to this topic. Even in science.
I’ll post an interesting study for you that illustrates this nicely.
That’s why even Viagra’s sexual enhancing effect was discovered by accident. For some reason, this innocuous heart medication kept getting stolen within their own lab… leading some to suspect that “something else” was “up”. It was!
PT-141 had a different original purpose, as well. I don’t know the inside story of that one, but I know it’s original purpose was different. Cool heads (and libidos) developed it, while hot heads and libidos don’t tend to advance much.
The way we modified androstenone in MX292 and later mixes was also a result of research that originally had nothing to do with sex. Nothing at all, actually.
Sex is something you just don’t tend to get much of if you go too directly after it. It’s part of the elusive obvious. It’s too “slippery” when wet, you could say! You have to tackle the whole thing when you’re “dry”, when you’re in a more logical state. You must be able to work around your own psychology, your own weaknesses, what some impartial engineers might call your “design flaws”.
Would like to, but don’t remember the name. It was a pill originally designed as a “tanning pill” but people noticed an “interesting effect” in that it not only acted like Viagra, but also made people want to have sex, e. g. made them horny. It was actually studied and past the FDA as an aphrodisiac. The first and only FDA approved one. I think I remember where I read about it and will look it up.
Are you sure you’re not confused? The link you posted says PT-141 was originally meant to be a tanning aid. If not, I’d like to know what the other drug is too.
Are you sure you’re not confused? The link you posted says PT-141 was originally part of a proposed tanning aid. If not, I’d be interestd in knowing what the newer one is too.
I would like to revert back to this point that Kitsune raised and hear others’ thoughts. Would the overuse of pheromones hurt our body’s ability to naturally produce our own?