# MX108- I Love This Stuff! **URL:** \ **Category:** Women's Pheromone Advice & Field Reports\ **Created:** [November 5, 2006, 7:27pm UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/mx108-i-love-this-stuff/849 "2006-11-05T19:27:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 14
**Author:** ![MHarris](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/pheromonetalk.com/mharris/32/2107_2.png) [@MHarris](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/MHarris)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2006, 1:45am UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/mx108-i-love-this-stuff/849/14 "2006-12-06T01:45:44Z")
> [@Ail](#): > > Removing the…COPULINS?? > > Umm..Michael, why would you do that? Maybe you should have a wee read through our most recent forum posts. > > Just about every one of us gals is using cops - a lot! > > ..or does this mean you’re almost ready to come out with your As-effective-as-Essence of Woman-while-not-compromising-your-beliefs, version of a copulin additive? Is that what you mean by us adding cops if we want? > > Now, that WOULD be something.. 🙂 > > We love the social pheromones of course, but those of us who use EW very regularly are DYING for you to bring out your version, or as near as dammit, without getting into territory you don’t want to enter.. > > It ain’t just the guys who like to play, and use pheromones for sexual purposes - far from it. ^\_~ > > Great to see you again, incidentally. > > Ail 🙂 Ail, I understand what you’re saying, and I fully and completely understand the importance of copulins to the ladies here. While Copulins aren’t the only sexual element for women (pheromones count, too!), you know first hand that even bad mixes of copulins have shown themselves to be extremely sexual in some contexts. Natural copulins also have a history of being used through the ages to create sexual results with a high degree of certainty. (and I preferably prefer the latter blend of copulins! 😉) So copulins are important. I’m not saying, and have never said they’re not. They’re certainly something interesting to develop, which why we’re investing significatly to have a new breed of copulins developed by a chemosensory artist skilled at replicating natural scents. However, that’s not yet done. As you know, product development takes years. The development of completely new copulin formulary isn’t something that happens overnight. Copulin formulation today (whether EW, what Pherone sells, or what we have) is all based on a formula found in a study that was made more than 20 years ago. It’s inelegant compared to the art of pheromone science we’ve achieve. It’s ugly, dark ages type stuff compared to what we do with [human pheromones](https://pheromonelabs.com/). For this reason, I don’t wish to include today’s substandard breed copulin formulary in any of my _test mixes that test novel pheromones and/or new pheromone ratios. Unless it’s a well worn mix, what I want to test just the pheromones_. The part that we have the most control over. The part we understand the part. The part we can with elegance and grace. We can do a test _with copulins_ added to a well tested _pheromone mix_ at the very the _end_. This will achieve better results, faster. Keep in mind that our pheromones (especially the newer ones and experimentals) cost a fortune to create, whereas current copulin formulary currently doesn’t. You can make a gallon of current style copulins for what it costs to make a single full size experimental mixes that use some of the more cutting edge molecules. If a superior pheromone blend and substandard copulins clash when blended together in one bottle, that’s a lot of money down the drain. Worse, keep in mind that testing too many unknowns costs us excessive time. Time that could’ve been spent getting usable data. Wasting time upsets me far more than wasting money. As wise men have been known to say – “I can always make more money, but I _can’t_ make more time!” For these reasons, I’m just going to go what we know works first, with as few variables (wildcards) as possible. You should understand that at least 3 of the DHC mixes shouldn’t have failed. There were a few others that were more experimental, but 3 were based on successful mixes women were using anyway, without copulins. The only wildcard that introduced different results were the copulins to already successful TAH based mixes. I added them _because_ of forum member requests. Yet most of the mixes designed to match those cries for mixes that include copulins were met will ill favor. Too many variables! Impossible to debug. So, to summarize, we’ll test what we’re best at – pheromone only mixes. Then, if a mix succeeds, we’ll add copulins sometime down the line… preferably our new revolutionary formula that will take copulins into the 21st century. Please understand… This is a testing strategy, not a rail against copulins. As they say, the best way to do things sometimes is “one step at a time”. Warmly, Michael --- _[View the full topic](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/mx108-i-love-this-stuff/849)._