As I understand it, the Instant line has the same neroli “scent package” as is used in the experimental mixes (e.g. MX 102) and offered as an option for the ExperiMones. Is this correct? MHarris also mentioned an almost “anosmic” musk element in the neroli scent…to me it is very noticable, especially at the “cologne (10%) concentration”. I’m just curious if anyone else has picked up on a noticable difference in the smell of IShine and MX 102-105. To my nose, IShine has a bit of a sweet smell to it, aside from the neroli scent. In comparison, MX 102 has a distinctly musky undertone…it’s not the same musk that I can smell in the neroli scent.
In fact, most pheromones are odors. Most of your own natural body odor is comprised of your own natural pheromones (or what skin bacteria does with your pheromones).
Even though the nice, orange like Neroli element stays the same in various products, the different pheromones in them add their own dimension of scent. Some are sweeter and lighter, some are muskier and heavier.
While some pheromones (Molecule A, TAA) scent is very hard to detect, most are quite detectable after you’ve used them for awhile. You noticed the scent change in Instant Shine, for instance, which isn’t easy. I can even smell pure “unscented” alpha nol quite easily, even though many people claim that anol is “scentless”.
Most of ads you read about “scentless” pheromones just aren’t correct. Most are just telling you what you want to believe, a story that you wish were true. They either ship you pheromones that have a scent, or, worse, they ship you “scentless” alcohol.
Lol yeah. Go to the gym and give yourself a nice workout, then take a shower (rinsing off) without using soap. You will wash away all the sweat and dirt, but you may notice some musky undertones.
