Hi everyone, I am new here and has spend about 15 hours over the last three days reading this forum to see how pheromone actually work.
I have read:
-Congruence? What’s That?
-What pheromones can do and what they cant Updated
-Mens Pheromone Guide revised 6/15
-Can Male semen attract women?
-Anyone ever been “busted”?
-An Introduction to Mones; Names, Size, Strength, Use, Effects & Length of
but still have two questions and I hope someone could clear it up for me.
How each product actually work and what’s the difference?
From what I can understand each product contains about 10 ingredients. One ingredient is the scent and the rest are molecular compounds that stimulate part of the brain to achieve the desired result. (e.g., release endorphin so talking to this guy and around him make the girl feel happy)
What I don’t understand is how can the producer be so sure of the effect of each product. For example, Instant Openness + Instant Honesty will have a person telling me her life story. This sounds too “truth serum” and unbelievable.
I can understand brand name pharmaceutical product works because the person ingested the drug but just inhaling?
What is pheromone vs. essential oil and scent candle? Pheromone are detected by the vomeronasal organ while essential oil and scent candle are smelled?
I am not trying to dis the product or the chemist that producted them. I am really just trying to understand how it work and how effective it can be.
OK this is how it works basically and in layman’s terms.
Lets look at it on a natural level first…
We all produce many different hormones depending on our gender, health, diet, race and age. Each of these hormones have different functions in our body. They signal the body to do certain things or be in a certain state. We secrete many of these hormones through sweat, urine, saliva, semen and vaginal fluids.
Pheromones are basically hormones that work outside of the body as well as inside. Every hormone is not a pheromone though. Some cant work outside for different reasons. Some other substances the body makes can act as a pheromone as well but to keep this simple we will just talk about hormones.
The human body sweats all the time to regulate its temperature. When it does the heat from our bodies evaporate that moisture into the atmosphere. The pheromone molecules are then diffused off the body into the air usually with the odor sweat or secretions create. Other people inhale them and these little molecules travel up the nasal passage to the brain where they connect and trigger different neurotransmitters.
Neurotransmitters are chemical messengers that send signals across neurons evoking a response. We have many different neurotransmitters in the brain. Certain pheromones trigger certain neurotransmitters evoking certain emotional feelings and responses.
The difference in products are pretty much self explanatory in there names and descriptions. On a biological level they trigger different neurotransmitters. People generally think pheromones just signal sexual attraction but they are part of how we communicate as mammals. We dont rely or consciously pay attention in this sense as much because unlike other mammals we are more advanced and verbal. However the ability to produce, emit and communicate pheromonally is still a instinctual part of us and work in our subconscious minds.
By producer I assume you mean the lab techs not the naturally producing person.
Its a combination of things. They know what different putatives signal inside the body which usually gives some indication of what the possibility is outside the body. They have tested many of these molecules for years and years and established behavior patterns and with some clinical studies. I am sure you have noticed some products have codes here like the P##"s and the MX###'s . These are part of the advanced testing. We test them and report in on what they do and they gather the info and look for indicators and patterns. The stuff sold in the consumer section have been used for years and have had more research done not just here but in many different scientific communities so we pretty much pinpointed what emotions those evoke.
That’s whats cool about AD, if your interested in the advancement of pheromones you can participate in the testing of the advanced molecules.
If you go on down to the studies and abstracts section you will see many studies on different pheromones derived from different places all over the scientific community. This will give you more insight into how they work and whats been discovered.
No one said its a truth serum. People will lie if they want to. They just feel a deeper feeling of comfort and connection when around you which makes them open up more.
Have you ever just met a person and clicked with them for no apparent reason ? Felt real comfortable with and like you have known them for years. They are easy to talk to. That’s pheromones. They dont take away the free will to say what you want or dont want. They just make you feel more open and commutative.
The VNO has been studied a lot and science has come to the conclusion that its not functioning in humans and that we inhale certain molecules straight into the brain. Remember before how I mentioned that not every hormone is a pheromones for various reasons. Well the size and weight of the molecule play a part.
However many scents evoke emotion. Essential oils are used in aromatherapy in much the same way as pheromones but pheromones tend to trigger stronger more predictable response in my opinion.
For instance think about the smell that something like Grandma’s apple pie can evoke in a person who grew up smelling it. That warm comfy safe loved feeling people get when they smell it, unless of course grandma frequently beat the shit of of you while she made apple pie then the smell would trigger negative emotions.
Hope this clears some of your questions up. I know it probably produced some new ones as well.
People report on the experience they have with using pheromones in http://www.pheromonetalk.com/mens-journals/ .
The knowledge that those experiments produced gets used to describe the effects of different products.
If yo want you can get straight to the source and read the journals yourself.
Could you point to the studies that describe the experiments that lead to the conclusion that the VNO doesn’t do anything in humans?
Maybe they have just shown that the VNO in humans isn’t as powerful as the VNO in other animals?
Thanks Tisha, my sister is a bio-chemist in training and when I am researching this topic she has commented that in class, the professor’s stance is that researchs done on pheromone in human are inconclusive. The research papers shown in class can be dividen into three groups. 1st group shows that pheromone work to some extend and can sync women’s cycle, hint of good desease resistance match, etc. The 2nd group shows that pheromone couldn’t possibly work in human as human lack a functioning VNO and the gene to process pheromone. The 3rd group shows the first two groups are wrong because the scientific researche carried out do not follow established scientific method enough therefore the researches are inconclusive.
I don’t know what to think but I am willing to carry out a few scientific test myself even if they are not close to be accurate.
Then the best place to start is with popping on up to the introduction section of the forum and doing a intro if you havent yet. This way you can get your $25 GC to the store.
They have small to-go size bottles that are inexpensive. You can get 2 almost free with your GC.
Stick with the Consumer products first, these are proven and under guarantee.
I would go with AMMO Ishine and IO to start. Then yiou can decide if you like them for yourself at a low cost.
We actually have quite a few biochemists who are members here and JVKohl who is a scientist in the field of pheromones is a member as well.My brother is a chemist as well. I know what most professors say and it really depends on if he/she keeps up with the current findings. Professors teach, scientist’s discover.
This assumes that we have an understanding of the genes that are involved in the process.
We don’t even understand the way in which smell works on a biochemical level.
We still don’t know the functions of thousands of genes.
There might be genes that get expressed in animals in the VNO that don’t get expressed in humans. It doesn’t mean the human VNO is completely unusable.
What people need to remember is that this is a new emerging science. No we dont have all the proof and facts yet but discoveries, advances and new insights are happening all the time.
When Newton discovered Gravity people thought he was nuts. Just because we dont fully understand something doesnt mean it doesnt exist though. Before Newton discovered gravity and named it we all knew if a apple fell out of a tree it would land on the ground. We couldnt explain why we just knew it would. LOL In most cases the studies and the proof comes way after the fact.
On April 16th, at the annual meeting of the Association for Chemoreception Sciences (AchemS) I presented our results from a study of college student women whose observed flirtatious behaviors increased, as did their self-reported level of attraction during 15 minutes exposure to a mixture of androstenol and androsterone.
This proof of concept has been largely ignored despite my extensive background and publication history. Perhaps people are waiting for more dramatic results. Meanwhile, as Tisha indicates, advances and insights, including other presentations from AChemS continue to show what most of us here have known for a long time: Human pheromones influence human behavior.
In my most recent presentation, I focused on the similarities between food odors and social odors (i.e., pheromones) in an attempt to get other researchers to tell me more about why they thought that the effects of social odors on hormones, and the affect of those hormones on behavior, were somehow different than those of food odors.
Current molecular biology and neuroscience make it clear that the mechanisms of cause and effect/affect are the same. Any reluctance to accept the biological facts is probably due to decades of being told/taught that we are primarily visual creatures–a concept that was not supported by any of the hundreds of AChemS presentations on various aspects of taste and smell.
As we wait for someone to show that the visual appeal of food influences our behavior more than does its chemical appeal (e.g., its odor) – which is not possible – we can either accept the biological fact that odors are more important to the development of our preferences for food and for other people, or wait for something to fall on our head that beats this biological fact into our brain. Meanwhile, most of us here will be spicing up our life with pheromone-enhanced fragrance products in precisely the same neuroscientifically proven way we spice up our food – with no explanation required. Other species don’t need scientists to tell them how food odors and social odors work, which gives new meaning to the term “dumb animals.”
The three groups you mention were well represented during a symposium at AChemS 2011. There was a brief discussion about use of the term “innate” (initiated by Michael Meredith) and what definition of the term “pheromones” should be used to unify various perspectives (responded to by Martha McClintock). This was despite the common theme linking mammalian pheromones to receptors (Lisa Stowers) and to hormonal and behavioral changes (Jane Hurst). Frederick Levy even had a powerpoint slide indicating the specific area of the sheep brain (MPOA) that produces a key hormone/neurotransmitter in response to pheromones.
I was incensed by the “infighting,” but said nothing during a symposium that should have brought researchers closer to a consensus, especially given our study results, which I was presenting the next day, on pheromones that affect women’s behavior.
The bottom line appears to be the development of factions within an olfactory research organization where some members are aware of results from their specific area, but largely unaware of results from other areas that integrate well into a mammalian model that extends findings from other species to humans from works with food odors and with social odors.
It is becoming ever more difficult for specialists to keep track of the latest research and integrate animal models into an overall perspective that makes sense. Nevertheless, I got the impression that some researchers want only to make their opinions known, and cling to them even in the face of new scientific knowledge that invalidates opinions, as new knowledge often does.
But one need not always look to the future in this regard. A world-renowned researcher in olfaction published a 1998 paper that linked food odors and social odors to hormones and behavior (see Appetite. 1998 Aug;31(1):1-8. Synthetic approach to the neurobiology of behaviour.Le Magnen J.) He wrote: “Positive feedback between the sensory stimuli coming from the partner and hormonal secretions is well known.” (p. 5).
Le Magnen’s perceptual synthesis is a neurobiological approach that crosses species boundaries, especially when the discussion is about mammals. Yet, more than a decade post its publication, we have olfactory researchers who seem intent upon characterizing pheromones and their effects/affects in every other species, but not in humans. On the other hand, we have students that are less willing to accept the opinions about science that are handed down to their teachers for dissemination as facts. In another decade or two, these students will be the presenters and discussants at symposiums that move us forward.
Behave peeps I just want to share his voice. You can listen to it here. Its fun to actually hear someone talking about mones instead of reading all the time.
James just a question . In most of the research I see on pheromones it all leans towards looking for pair bonding, mate choice, and sexual attraction. Marketing has a lot to do with this of course. Sex sells so thats what the buzz is about. So it stands to reason scientists attention will go in that direction first when exploring discoveries.
Are scientists looking at other pheromone related behaviors ? There is more to life then pair bonding and sex. For instance do they study how pheromones possibly effect happiness or calmness etc etc…
With studies like you mentioned with anone and the dentist chair. Maybe its not sexual attraction that is making them sit there. Maybe another emotion and response is coming into play.
Could be conditioned response to smell like you mentioned. Maybe the stink of anone reminds them of a positive protective male figure in some way and makes them feel more secure and safe. People get scared at the dentist. I know anone is generally more aggressive from what users report but it also depends on other factors going on with the persons environment and state of mind at the time. I am not saying this is the case with the chair test. I am just using it as a example to my question.
Thanks for the plug. No shame in attempting to draw out information on human sexuality. Most of us could use more info. You are correct about the non-sexual effects/affects and how they might be of more significance to couples, or even to women who want to regulate their menstrual cycle. Given the overwhelming effect of odors to induce recall of specific memorable events, the marketers who focus on sex are merely scratching the surface all the while the are making unsupported claims abut what their products can do. I’m all for the subtle variations that enhance interactions amoung people in everyday life; it;s simply not just about getting laid, it’s about getting along in different social circumstances where your scent signature might be held in check by those with higher levels of hormones that convert to beneficial pheromones. Personally, I want ever advantage, even at work. So it’s not just about being out looking for sex.
To be completely honest - I’m somebody who knows more about social interaction and people “at their core” than I do the science - but to me the “socials” do far more than the heavy hitters like anone. Sure, some people feel they need that punch but I get better “sexual” results with products like Shine and Honesty than I do Ammo.
Not all sex is to mate regarding humans, so it stands to reason that giving a “mating male” signal isn’t always necessary.
I should mention though that I do naturally produce quite a bit of testosterone.
Is there a scientific basis for that? Or do you think the cycle is the only major factor?
What is currently known suggests that women are making choices for higher testosterone at the time they are most likely to conceive, and this parallels what happens in other mammalian females that make their choice for the highest levels of androgenic pheromones. Obviously, women are going to consider many other things, but the androgenic (e.g., testosterone-associated) pheromones are going to increase the odds of the user being chosen. Even if she’s not in her ovulatory “choice” phase, pheromone enhancement can elicit the social affects you mention, and good social vibes are likely to lead somewhere. Arguably, someone with a testosterone level already in the higher range could overdue it with the addition of AND or -none, which have not yet been shown to positively affect women’s behavior.
I just returned from duties as an external examiner of a thesis about hormones and olfaction, which was successfully defended by a student I hope to be working with as she progresses to publication of her results working with the -rone and -none I supplied. It was her study design, and the study was done independently without my involvement. What’s most important at this point is that she used -rone, so we may finally be making progress with a species-specific, putative individual human male-specific chemical signal of reproductive fitness. Colleagues in Vienna also are testing -rone in more complex conditions. You can expect to begin seeing results in another year or so that will help to detail the various factors involved in social and sexual selection. No reason to think that these results will show anything different than what product users are already reporting. Your results are not likely to be anomalous.
It details how we did what we did, and why, which led us to show the first ever affects of a mixture of human pheromones on observed flirtatious behavior in women – and, as an after-thought a self reported increase in attraction. Just the facts.
I know that this will likely make some people mad, but it needs to be said…
I think that a lot of the reason people reject the idea of pheromones when it comes to humans is actually pretty simple…
Religion!
A lot of religions drill into people’s heads that humans are not animals but something separate from the animal kingdom. Now, I’m not trying to start a religion vs agnostic/atheist debate or whatever, but we are classified as a member of the great ape species for a reason. And being animals, it is indeed quite logical that we’d be compliant with pheromone effects.
Another problem/talking point?
Denial!
This sort of goes along with the idea that humans tend to push things that they don’t understand out of their minds (ignore), react angrily to the concept they don’t understand (defense mechanism), or Deny it’s existing completely.
When I’ve told people about the effects of a1 on pms’ing women and the effects of none on ovulating women, they generally take one of the three choices, just because they don’t want to accept that it’s possible that a scent could totally alter perceptions/biological reactions/etc.
Then I spray on some IJ and tell them to shut up. (JK!)
Why would people be mad ?? Having differing opinions is no reason to be mad at someone.
I agree that culture plays a large part on how people see many things including religion and science. Many people here on the forum have spoken about using mones being against god in some way. I dont agree but I am not religious really. I dont see paganism as a religion but as a natural belief system.
I dont know if I agree that religion tries to drill this into people. I feel it tries to control others through fear. I spoke about our differences to animals in another thread and I think many are misunderstanding what I was trying to convey. Animals vs Humans, decision making, and cheating.
On the large scale humans are animals. We fall into the category of living breathing eating breeding moving. We all possess instinct that influences us to act and react certain ways for our survival. In this way I have many times indicated you cant blame men for there preferences and urges. However in the other post the OP was suggesting that because of instinct people are not to blame for there choices and actions and this is where our beliefs part ways.
What separates us from the rest of the animals kingdom is our brains and thought processes. Science drills into us that although we are part of the animal kingdom our brains are far superior to that of other animals.
Here this article in Scientific America explains it better then I can.
I agree that many people dont like to think of us as animals for the wrong reasons. Animals are wild, uncivilized and unpredictable. Then there are those who believe the polar opposite. The believe we are animals and act on instinct alone therefore we are not responsible for our actions. Humans have found balance between those two worlds.
As for why some are against mones…
I think many people are opposed to mones for one simple reason and its a reason that plagues every human and further proves we have control of our instincts. Animals are never afraid of there own instincts, its all they have to go on.
Fear, fear of what they dont understand. Fear of losing there control.
Those who are into mones and use them all know that mones influence our instincts, They engage that part of us that is instinctual. However we all also know that they never take away the ability to choose. That in itself proves humans control over instinct and what separates us from the animal kingdom.
When animals are in heat they dont stop to think logically. Do I want kids now, can I support them now, is that girl to an 5 or a 10. Is she playing me ??? etc etc. All these questions and choices come into our consciousness. Animals just mate on instinct alone.
When animals are hungry they dont sit down and decide what exactly they want to eat today. They find a food source and eat it. They dont care if its another animals or even a human. Hungry = find food and eat it.
Other species do not think feel or learn like we do. This is not to say that other species of animals do not have the ability to think, feel or learn. Humans just happens to have the ability to “mingle all our domains of knowledge” into choice. We get to choose therefore we are responsible for our actions.
