Congruence, learned behavior and altering ones pheromone signature

[RADMAN513]

I’ve read numerous posts regarding pheromone production and how humans might naturally increase it. (I’ve even read an add for a product that claims it can stimulate it, though I suspect that’s bogus). In my readings on pheromones here and my own knowledge of endocrinology with regards to anabolics and androgens I’ve come to a couple of idea’s.

I figure that since most pheromones are metabolites/derivatives of testosterone, that simply raising ones testosterone levels will help cause an across the board increase in ones pheromone production in general…and most likely none and A1 more specifically.

It also seems that Rone is metabolized in the liver and to that end I began taking herbal supplements designed to detoxify and support healthy liver function.

Now in a lot of ways these three mones communicate general health, fitness and strength for the purpose of being seen as a potential mate/sexual partner.

My question is more about “mood” and “personality” communication through pheromones. Products high in Nols are considered social and influence verbal communication. Take Instant Openness for example, a product very high in Alpha Androstenol…it seems to create a very light and friendly mood and encourages people to engage in fun chit chat with the wearer. As though the signal said “Hi, I’m a fun social guy that’s very friendly and easy to talk to, come say ‘hi’ to me”.
Now a lot of shy users that suffer from approach anxiety will find this product recommended for them and rightfully so (whether they follow the advise or not varies).
Now if an individual was shy, it’s assumed that he probably produces very low levels of A-nol. However, if over time, the individual were to make a conscious effort to initiate conversation more often, and be more talkative during conversations…to the point that he became more comfortable engaging strangers, would this effect his natural pheromone output?
Does forcing yourself to be more social, effect hormones or neurotransmitters enough to cause the natural signal to change?

I’ve mentioned before that I suspect there to be a connection between Beta Androstenol and Oxytocin. Since IH seems to work in the way Liquid Trust is advertised as working. I believe that a person exposed to a high Beta Nol signature would experience a rise is Oxytocin levels in their brain. And possibly the levels of Oxytocin might influence the production of Beta Nol.
With this theory, a person making a conscious effort to strengthen existing social ties with family and friends might influence their own natural production of Beta Nol over the long term.

I openly admit this is based off of oversimplified childlike logic of “if A is true, and B is true, the C must be true as well”. I have no idea if it actually is however and would like the input of others who might be more educated on the subject to voice their opinions.

Does forced or conscious change in ones social behavior and comfort level in social situations effect ones signature with regard to social mones? Or…does your production of social mones remain relatively unchanged regardless of forcing yourself to become a more social person?

[tisha23]

Does forced or conscious change in ones social behavior and comfort level in social situations effect ones signature with regard to social mones ? Or…does your production of social mones remain relatively unchanged regardless of forcing yourself to become a more social person?

Mammals produce different types of pheromones that are characterised into different groups. This is something thats more apparent in research in animal and insects but evidence is slowly showing it to be true in humans as well.

Information and Primer pheromones say something about the persons biology. Thier core traits.

Primer and signal pheromones say something about the persons emotional state and behavior.

Its my opinion that using mones will never change your Information and Primer mones. This only happens with a biology change. For instance ageing or working out and increasing muscle mass.

However signal mones can be changed by a change in your emotional state and well being. So if you force your self to be more talkative my opinion is yes you will emit more of those pheromones that coincide with socialization. They do not change your core signature though.

Your signature speaks of your biology. Your signalers speak of your state of mind. Your signalers enhance your signature.

I’ve mentioned before that I suspect there to be a connection between Beta Androstenol and Oxytocin. Since IH seems to work in the way Liquid Trust is advertised as working. I believe that a person exposed to a high Beta Nol signature would experience a rise is Oxytocin levels in their brain. And possibly the levels of Oxytocin might influence the production of Beta Nol.
With this theory, a person making a conscious effort to strengthen existing social ties with family and friends might influence their own natural production of Beta Nol over the long term.

I have to disagree with this only because Liquid Trust has other pheromone in it besides Oxytocin. So the only connection between them as products is that LT most likely has Bnol in it. Now this is not to say that high levels of Bnol cant produce more oxytocin in the body. That I dont know. Just dont make that determination by comparing LT’s reported effect and Bnols reported effect. I will mention also that LT is not a highly effective product. In fact most users see no results with it even with the presence of other mones. I suspect its because they use a lower ratio of mones to oxytocin. There is no conclusive evidence for entry of oxytocin to the brain through intranasal administration. Its also to heavy to act as a pheromone. According to Di, its 4 or 5 times heavier which makes it highly unlikely that it can effectively diffuse off the body. Now all this still doesn’t indicate that high levels of bnol do not effect oxytocin production but these are all things to keep in mind while researching your answers and coming to conclusions.

I openly admit this is based off of oversimplified childlike logic of “if A is true, and B is true, the C must be true as well”. I have no idea if it actually is however and would like the input of others who might be more educated on the subject to voice their opinions.

I disagree, every great discovery ever made, all of science begins with a persons childlike wonder and curiosity of the world around them. Science is based on If A is true and B is true then Logic dictates that C must be true. That is the stating point of proving C.

Tisha

[RADMAN513]

@tisha23

Mammals produce different types of pheromones that are characterised into different groups. This is something thats more apparent in research in animal and insects but evidence is slowly showing it to be true in humans as well.

Information and Primer pheromones say something about the persons biology. Thier core traits.

Primer and signal pheromones say something about the persons emotional state and behavior.

Its my opinion that using mones will never change your Information and Primer mones. This only happens with a biology change. For instance ageing or working out and increasing muscle mass.

However signal mones can be changed by a change in your emotional state and well being. So if you force your self to be more talkative my opinion is yes you will emit more of those pheromones that coincide with socialization. They do not change your core signature though.

Your signature speaks of your biology. Your signalers speak of your state of mind. Your signalers enhance your signature.

I have to disagree with this only because Liquid Trust has other pheromone in it besides Oxytocin. So the only connection between them as products is that LT most likely has Bnol in it. Now this is not to say that high levels of Bnol cant produce more oxytocin in the body. That I dont know. Just dont make that determination by comparing LT’s reported effect and Bnols reported effect. I will mention also that LT is not a highly effective product. In fact most users see no results with it even with the presence of other mones. I suspect its because they use a lower ratio of mones to oxytocin. There is no conclusive evidence for entry of oxytocin to the brain through intranasal administration. Its also to heavy to act as a pheromone. According to Di, its 4 or 5 times heavier which makes it highly unlikely that it can effectively diffuse off the body. Now all this still doesn’t indicate that high levels of bnol do not effect oxytocin production but these are all things to keep in mind while researching your answers and coming to conclusions.

I disagree, every great discovery ever made, all of science begins with a persons childlike wonder and curiosity of the world around them. Science is based on If A is true and B is true then Logic dictates that C must be true. That is the stating point of proving C.

Tisha

Perhaps I misspoke. I’m pretty sure that Liquid Trust is ineffective, or at least the Oxytocin is…being heavy and short lived as it is when outside the body. What I’m saying is that with IH I tend to get the kind of effects that liquid trust claims to get.
Based off of that and knowing that Oxytocin IS a bonding and trust hormone, my theory is that when a person is exposed to a high level of Bnol, that the signal causes the brain to produce more Oxytocin.

As for signalers and core signature. I’m suggesting that if a person is naturally shy and tend to feel approach anxiety and stress during social situations, particularly with strangers, they probably produce very low levels of social pheromones.
However as we know, learned behavior can effect long term perception. If a man goes through a period of forcing himself to be more social (as advocated by various schools of pickup and seduction) opening set after set…he should eventually overcome his approach anxiety. And not only feel more at ease in social situation, but learn to enjoy them and approach opening conversation with more enthusiasm.
When this state is achieved, the individual has essentially changed. Granted it’s a change that’s only noticeable during specific situations, but that he’s now more open and welcoming to social situations is a change in who he is, not simply what he’s doing.
Verbal communication activates certain parts of the brain, if done often enough and under the right kind of conditions (positive, fun, enjoyable situations) the brain might become permanently hard wired to be more social, which in turn would effect the bodies production of certain social pheromones.

I actually think that forcing ones self to be more social would have a negative short term effect. As the action is forced and the comfort level is low, stress, fear and anxiety signalers would be high…fearomones would be produced that might create a sense of unease and tension in those exposed. This has been discussed in other threads. However the long term effect as comfort with social situations increases, and positive results come from interactions, the individual becomes more confident, motivated and enthusiastic about opening conversations. He goes from approach anxiety (negative feelings) to approach tolerance (neutral feelings) to approach enthusiasm (positive feelings) about social situations…the long term effect on his brain chemistry might have a side effect on his signature.

In this respect I’m suggesting natural production of Anol. Now as you said it is possible there is a core signature (who I am) and short term accent signals (how I feel right now) and it may follow more along those lines. However a weight lifter is not strong only when lifting…he’s done it with enough frequency for a long enough period of time that his strength is always there in preparation for when it’s needed.

I likewise suspect that a person that makes a conscious effort to strengthen the number and intensity of deeper social ties might produce more hormones and neurotransmitters associated with “connection” and thus increase their production of pheromones that stimulate that. IE spend more time connecting and communicating with family and friends and one might increase production of Bnol.

[jesuitofdelphi]

@RADMAN513

However as we know, learned behavior can effect long term perception. If a man goes through a period of forcing himself to be more social (as advocated by various schools of pickup and seduction) opening set after set…he should eventually overcome his approach anxiety. And not only feel more at ease in social situation, but learn to enjoy them and approach opening conversation with more enthusiasm.
When this state is achieved, the individual has essentially changed. Granted it’s a change that’s only noticeable during specific situations, but that he’s now more open and welcoming to social situations is a change in who he is, not simply what he’s doing.
Verbal communication activates certain parts of the brain, if done often enough and under the right kind of conditions (positive, fun, enjoyable situations) the brain might become permanently hard wired to be more social, which in turn would effect the bodies production of certain social pheromones.

I actually think that forcing ones self to be more social would have a negative short term effect. As the action is forced and the comfort level is low, stress, fear and anxiety signalers would be high…fearomones would be produced that might create a sense of unease and tension in those exposed. This has been discussed in other threads. However the long term effect as comfort with social situations increases, and positive results come from interactions, the individual becomes more confident, motivated and enthusiastic about opening conversations. He goes from approach anxiety (negative feelings) to approach tolerance (neutral feelings) to approach enthusiasm (positive feelings) about social situations…the long term effect on his brain chemistry might have a side effect on his signature.

So my specialty clearly doesn’t lie in endocrinology, but as this bleeds into an interdisciplinary question, I’ll take a stab. My work is in neurophysiological development as regards interpersonal activity. I want to start out by affirming and echoing a really important statement in your previous post. Mammals in general and humans in specific have exhibited many tendencies to fundamentally change production of pheromones based on consistent, extrinsic circumstances (so clearly we’re not talking about puberty here). We see this most acutely with environmental factors that limit access to vital resources. But in humans we have a very interesting experience with this in males. Fatherhood. While females obviously have an internal change in hormonal structure, men acquire theirs entirely from the perceived circumstance. In fact, fathers who leave shortly after that child is born show significantly lesser change, though it still appears to some degree.

While we’re not yet sure of the variety of experiences that can induce this sort of change, the level of consistency required or centers of the brain most active in guiding hormonal paradigm shifts, we are very aware that this is an active part of the human experience. Learned behavior and changing perception of environmental demands DO have long-term influences on hormone production, including pheromones.

I will not that “permanent” change is probably a bad way to put it. Neuroplasticity is a rather key concept to hold in the framework here.