"…our results demonstrate that odour encodes complex genotypic information in an Old World monkey. These findings are exciting, because they serve to fill the deep phylogenetic gap between studies of rodents (mainly laboratory strains) and humans.
As Dr. Doty’s book continues to be mentioned in the press, it might be good for others to know the truth about mammalian pheromones.
Personally I think Dotty comes off as someone who hasn’t done his research and as such foolish. There are so many others who do know and believe pheromones but he conveniently ignores them completely. I wonder what his motivation is?
“Richard Doty misrepresents the original concept of pheromones when he indicates the concept infers “… that a plurality of mammalian behaviors and endocrine responses is uniquely determined in an invariant way by single or small sets of chemical stimuli….” (p. 3). Through his attempt to change the concept of mammalian pheromones, he also attempts to convince others that mammalian pheromones do not exist. Simply put, he builds a theoretical “straw man,” and then attacks it. In truth, it is inconceivable that any sensory stimulus from the social environment (e.g, an environment containing other members of the same species) determines anything about mammalian behavior in an invariant way.”
When a prominent olfactory researcher misses something as significant as human pheromones have turned out to be, he can either make an embarrassing statement about his ignorance, or continue to ignore the current data. Personally, I think he would have been better off to simply ignore the current data. Writing a book with claims that mammalian pheromones don’t exist simply calls attention to the fact that he missed something that continues to be of huge significance to us all. Even many of the researchers who are somewhat current with the concept have missed its more far-reaching aspects (e.g., found in molecular biology), as those who have followed my works will soon begin to see.
You’re welcome. It is now time to look at Doty’s supporters in a new light. Who are the people that think he’s right, and what have they missed? Donald A. Wilson is a highly respected researcher/author who wrote a review for the book cover: “The field of mammalian pheromones is a bit sloppy and human pheromones a complete mess. This book will make a major contribution to the field by either galvanizing people to prove Doty wrong or applying brakes to a field that may be fast moving down the wrong track.”
I disagree with part of that perspective. No one needs to prove Doty wrong because he has proceeded based on obviously false premises. But Wilson is probably right that Doty’s book will apply brakes to research, albeit research that is already beginning to show promise with its across species look at the molecular biology that’s important to learning and memory, immune responses, neuroanatomy, behavior, developmental staging and much more. People like Doty are the ones who put the brakes on important discoveries that may now take years longer to make–because he missed out, decades ago.
Please comment to this Forum if you happen to read any other reviews of Doty’s book. Several esteemed colleagues told me they were going to write one, so I simply published mine to my domain. I don’t know why we haven’t seen anything from SOSI, National Geographic, JAMA or other groups that should be taking a stand. What’s worse is that Oprah hasn’t called me.
I quote: “No one is spared in his examination of the pheromone literature.”
This is not correct; Doty made no mention of any of my publications, including my book, and no mention of our presentations that demonstrate the existence of human pheromones via their affect on women’s flirtatious behaviors. When I asked him why he didn’t include my works, he simply said he couldn’t cover everyone. I know that he couldn’t cover mine and still attempt to convince others that mammalian pheromones, including human pheromones don’t exist.
