My Journey Using 'Mones

[ElijahGuru]

Hey guys,

The purpose of this thread is sort of a plea for help, but in order for anyone to make a very educated opinion, theory, suggestion or all of the above, I’m going to have to give you guys an entire breakdown of my journey with pheromones. First off, I’ve been using pheromones everyday for the past month (I know, I know, it’s bad)…When I first decided to buy pheromones it was because of an article posted on PUATraining on the best pheromones. The author claimed PherX to be the best produce on the market. Therefore, my first choice was to buy that. I bought both the oil and spray versions of the product. I started with the spray: at three sprays a day on my neck, and after a week switched to the oil version and literally covered the back of my ears with oil. After a while I notcord that women gave me strange looks as if I just took a shit in public. I stopped using PherX and the next day, as to my amazement my orders of IS and TUTH were delivered to my house, I began combining 2 sprays of double strength IS and two sprays of experts only TUTH. I used this combo for a week and then just recently switched to simply three sprays of IS.

Now I know this might be a rhetorical question but…am I on the verge of OD’ing if I haven’t OD’D already? What should I do to better ensure that the pheromones in my possession work more effectively?

Thanks in advance.

[mrseeker]

I would say start slow. Start with 2 sprays regular dosage and slowly ramp up to 4. Same goes for drops. Start slow and ramp up the dosage until you see the effects.

I rarely go above 4 sprays (or 20mcg) unless I want to OD myself. There is a strong vibe coming off, and the sprays are rather potent. All the sprays here are perfectly dosed at 2 sprays for the regular version, and the double strength is a multiplier, so you need half the sprays of the regular ones.

EDIT: TUTH at 4+ sprays is similar to your dick hanging out of your pants and swinging it around like you are some sex god

[Charles_W]

While some sprays, esp. the high-dose ones of other vendors, do sometimes make dramatic results for some people, we’ve found them a problem for a global audience.

AMMO could be made at high potency. 2X strength by default. And in fact, we’ll sell 2X AMMO to younger gents as well as 2X and 4X IH.

2 sprays of 4X IH hasn’t the great OD of androstenone products like AMMO or TUTH.

Our experiments developing AMMO showed 2X might be good (and more economical per spray) for men over 30.

But the standard 1X does work for young men and older ones at one spray, with the option to increase to 2.

Our strategy was not to make a product that generates 10pc customer returns but success for 90pc.

With global shipping, that would be a nightmare to reship.

And even cos. that offer guarantee, that’s not the issue. Many custs. of PherX or other poorly dosed sprays never bother with 2nd ships. They pitch them in rubbish bin.

The world is a massive body indeed. Even our costly MX experiments, anti-bias testing and $1K’s in free pheromones (P97 this week) don’t assure that AMMO will work for every man in every country.

But this costly research gets us as near to 100pc satisfaction as we are able to get.

And, in spite of advert claims, we may ship more research molecules daily than some others do weekly. And more posts to this board daily than others by the week.

If we may boast a moment, we try to avoid these OD issues or foul smells by spending tremendous funds on research since 2003.

They talk research. We do it. And there will be at least 4 new Putative research molecules on Freebie in coming weeks. It’s already queued in shop.

Ideally, if we’d develop a new product, a testing sample of 5000 at random from the global population would be good science. That may be a difficult goal, but we’re worlds better than PherX, whom I’d suspect tested it on few people, if any.

Or they just don’t care about customer returns and only reach for the quick dollar, cheap and dirty.

Those of you who’ve had stats. at Uni. understand how vital statistical controls and sample size are. Often, what vendors are calling “testing” science would call deeply biased, flawed methodology and untrustworthy anecdotes.

[mrseeker]

@Charles_W

If we may boast a moment, we try to avoid these OD issues or foul smells by spending tremendous funds on research since 2003.

And if my memory serves well, you ship directly from the lab, to the customer, without any interference from 3rd parties or external companies that rebrand or dilute the spray.

@Charles_W

They talk research. We do it. And there will be at least 4 new Putative research molecules on Freebie in coming weeks. It’s already queued in shop.

Totally new ones, or older ones that need some extra push?

@Charles_W

Or they just don’t care about customer returns and only reach for the quick dollar, cheap and dirty.

Would not be the first company that did that… Had my experience with those quick & dirty too. I always say “goedkoop is duurkoop”, or in english: “buy cheap, get diluted pheromone sprays.”

@Charles_W

Those of you who’ve had stats. at Uni. understand how vital statistical controls and sample size are. Often, what vendors are calling “testing” science would call deeply biased, flawed methodology and untrustworthy anecdotes.

Are you talking here about the propability density function here? The bigger the sample size, the bigger the certainty that if the dosage is between 2 values the average joe will certainly receive some effects? Probability density function - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Charles_W]

Are you talking here about the probability density function here? The bigger the sample size, the bigger the certainty that if the dosage is between 2 values the average joe will certainly receive some effects? Probability density function - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Yes. We’re trying to do better at educating the pheromone user. The words “testing” and “research” have become perverted to confuse anecdotes with mathematically conclusive findings.

If the White House or Windsor Palace “tests” P97 and writes 20 posh anecdotes on fine parchment, it’s doesn’t mean the tests are more accurate by virtue of experience or royalty. Science would likely prefer the tester had NO experience at all, since humans are never free of biases based upon prior life experience.

One standard deviation away from the mean in either direction on the horizontal axis accounts for somewhere around 68 percent of the people in a group. Two standard deviations away from the mean (the four areas closest to the center areas) account for roughly 95 percent of the people. And three standard deviations (all the shaded areas) account for about 99 percent of the people.

An ideal product like AMMO, marketed for many races and climates worldwide, should function at 1 spray with few negatives and many positives, hopefully for 95pc of users. 99pc even better.

We can sort the odd Zendesk ticket or reship for that 5pc or 1pc that just aren’t happy with the frag. or the pheros.

And within a large global market, there will be the odd return or reship. Can’t be helped.

Would be nice of we could say with 95pc confidence MX353 would work at 1-2 sprays and that 95pc would be satisfied, but the data pool has not be reached to that level. It’s a difficult battle of education as it seems the fundamentals of science (non-anecdotal reporting, anti-bias controls) aren’t taught in schools as they should be.

And some testers mistake chat boards for rigourous testing, which they are not. The more the tests are discussed, the more biased the results become, as the inexperienced censor their own views to conform to what they feel are more experienced testers. But the experienced may be dead wrong, and the novice may be correct, because his views are not tainted by history.

[ElijahGuru]

@Charles_W

While some sprays, esp. the high-dose ones of other vendors, do sometimes make dramatic results for some people, we’ve found them a problem for a global audience.

AMMO could be made at high potency. 2X strength by default. And in fact, we’ll sell 2X AMMO to younger gents as well as 2X and 4X IH.

2 sprays of 4X IH hasn’t the great OD of androstenone products like AMMO or TUTH.

Our experiments developing AMMO showed 2X might be good (and more economical per spray) for men over 30.

But the standard 1X does work for young men and older ones at one spray, with the option to increase to 2.

Our strategy was not to make a product that generates 10pc customer returns but success for 90pc.

With global shipping, that would be a nightmare to reship.

And even cos. that offer guarantee, that’s not the issue. Many custs. of PherX or other poorly dosed sprays never bother with 2nd ships. They pitch them in rubbish bin.

The world is a massive body indeed. Even our costly MX experiments, anti-bias testing and $1K’s in free pheromones (P97 this week) don’t assure that AMMO will work for every man in every country.

But this costly research gets us as near to 100pc satisfaction as we are able to get.

And, in spite of advert claims, we may ship more research molecules daily than some others do weekly. And more posts to this board daily than others by the week.

If we may boast a moment, we try to avoid these OD issues or foul smells by spending tremendous funds on research since 2003.

They talk research. We do it. And there will be at least 4 new Putative research molecules on Freebie in coming weeks. It’s already queued in shop.

Ideally, if we’d develop a new product, a testing sample of 5000 at random from the global population would be good science. That may be a difficult goal, but we’re worlds better than PherX, whom I’d suspect tested it on few people, if any.

Or they just don’t care about customer returns and only reach for the quick dollar, cheap and dirty.

Those of you who’ve had stats. at Uni. understand how vital statistical controls and sample size are. Often, what vendors are calling “testing” science would call deeply biased, flawed methodology and untrustworthy anecdotes.

Fair- And you make a very valid point by making the assertion that many companies do not mention their sample size, when they do conduct, or have conducted their methodology…which brings me to my next question…how big was your sample size? Is the sample representative? I mean, I’m a 25 year old Canadian, South Asian male…has anyone like me, in your research, tested your products? If not, maybe that’s why pheremones are inconsistent: either a hit or a miss for me. Is it because I’ve used pheremones for far too long and should take a break from them?

[ElijahGuru]

@Charles_W

Yes. We’re trying to do better at educating the pheromone user. The words “testing” and “research” have become perverted to confuse anecdotes with mathematically conclusive findings.

If the White House or Windsor Palace “tests” P97 and writes 20 posh anecdotes on fine parchment, it’s doesn’t mean the tests are more accurate by virtue of experience or royalty. Science would likely prefer the tester had NO experience at all, since humans are never free of biases based upon prior life experience.

One standard deviation away from the mean in either direction on the horizontal axis accounts for somewhere around 68 percent of the people in a group. Two standard deviations away from the mean (the four areas closest to the center areas) account for roughly 95 percent of the people. And three standard deviations (all the shaded areas) account for about 99 percent of the people.

An ideal product like AMMO, marketed for many races and climates worldwide, should function at 1 spray with few negatives and many positives, hopefully for 95pc of users. 99pc even better.

We can sort the odd Zendesk ticket or reship for that 5pc or 1pc that just aren’t happy with the frag. or the pheros.

And within a large global market, there will be the odd return or reship. Can’t be helped.

Would be nice of we could say with 95pc confidence MX353 would work at 1-2 sprays and that 95pc would be satisfied, but the data pool has not be reached to that level. It’s a difficult battle of education as it seems the fundamentals of science (non-anecdotal reporting, anti-bias controls) aren’t taught in schools as they should be.

And some testers mistake chat boards for rigourous testing, which they are not. The more the tests are discussed, the more biased the results become, as the inexperienced censor their own views to conform to what they feel are more experienced testers. But the experienced may be dead wrong, and the novice may be correct, because his views are not tainted by history.

A little difficult to understand here. Lol. But hey, I support whatever it is you’re trying to say here

[Dee_A]

@ElijahGuru

Hey guys,

The purpose of this thread is sort of a plea for help, but in order for anyone to make a very educated opinion, theory, suggestion or all of the above, I’m going to have to give you guys an entire breakdown of my journey with pheromones. First off, I’ve been using pheromones everyday for the past month (I know, I know, it’s bad)…When I first decided to buy pheromones it was because of an article posted on PUATraining on the best pheromones. The author claimed PherX to be the best produce on the market. Therefore, my first choice was to buy that. I bought both the oil and spray versions of the product. I started with the spray: at three sprays a day on my neck, and after a week switched to the oil version and literally covered the back of my ears with oil. After a while I notcord that women gave me strange looks as if I just took a shit in public. I stopped using PherX and the next day, as to my amazement my orders of IS and TUTH were delivered to my house, I began combining 2 sprays of double strength IS and two sprays of experts only TUTH. I used this combo for a week and then just recently switched to simply three sprays of IS.

Now I know this might be a rhetorical question but…am I on the verge of OD’ing if I haven’t OD’D already? What should I do to better ensure that the pheromones in my possession work more effectively?

Thanks in advance.

You might be OD’ing but I won’t dwell on that.

I’ll pull you down to the basics. Try testing both IS and TUTH solo first. That way, you will understand what phero is causing a particular effect whenever you combine it with each other. Remember that TUTH works best for you the in the lowest dosage, specially because of your age.

And since IS and TUTH are the only sane pheros you have, I suggest that if you can’t stop the urge to combine them, always apply TUTH on its lowest dosage (assuming that your target are young women). IS+TUTH is a good clubbing mix. Up the TUTH if your target is a mature women.

Regarding the other products, if they have money back guarantee, go get it, and order some AMMO from AD. AMMO will fortify your growing pheromone armaments for sure.

Happy pheroing and never be afraid to test!

[Charles_W]

Answering the question of sample size. I don’t have precise numbers. MX101 was the first real MX. Approx. 9 years ago. MX297 is probably the longest run of continuously stocked MX. It perhaps has the largest and broadest data set of any experimental pheromone product. The number of posts must be in the hundreds. How many exposed targets at a bar or club? Perhaps in the 1000’s.

We have discussed at length ways to move MX from first release to consumer within 2 years. In early days, reports quality was excellent. It began to deteriorate somewhat ca. 2010. The “hype” problem. MX like 301 were “promoted.” Oh, yes, the did show results. But if a prominent figure tells you something does such and such, is it true.

If the man in the lab coat says the pill works, how much is due to the pill and how much to the coat?

We occasionally run placebo or other quality tests. Not often. This is part of our Terms for MX. We make no secret or conspiracy. We also offer whopping discounts, so…

Here’s the real truth of some of the hype: it didn’t stand our quality tests. In some cases, the alleged results did not match up to par with placebo other blind tests anti-bias measures.

Again, we use placebo quite rarely and only when needed to calibrate data.

As you will see when some early packs come off embargo, the performance of some MX in the pack varies greatly. Some will be successful, some perhaps less so.

Therefore, some MX we continue or bring back (MX135, MX353) and some are removed.

If every experiment had no unsuccessful outcomes, it wouldn’t be an experiment.

It’s not good enough that MX297 work for 200 people (although it does). We’d like to see it work for 200,000 and have a sufficient sample size for high confidence.

When a product says “Instant Honesty” it must instantly deliver honesty. This is the rule established by the co. founders. The experiments continue until we know with near certainty the product does as claimed.

We now feel Come Talk To Me does what it says, and we brought it back as a consumer spray with full guarantee.

Our goal is to double the number of Reporting Users in 6 months. All of these will become more affordable, test reports will double, embargoes will end sooner and more MX will become mainstream. We will resvolve the hype and other issues from 2011-2013 now that necessary staffing adjustments are effected.

[mrseeker]

@Charles_W

We have discussed at length ways to move MX from first release to consumer within 2 years. In early days, reports quality was excellent. It began to deteriorate somewhat ca. 2010. The “hype” problem. MX like 301 were “promoted.” Oh, yes, the did show results. But if a prominent figure tells you something does such and such, is it true.

Are you referring here to SteveO? If I look at it, it seems he was actually telling people that the mixture he was wearing was indeed giving him effects, which gave people the impression that it worked. Yes, the psychological side of an MX release is also a bit of a problem, and I do understand that when you release a new mixture you don’t like to give too much away. I am already happy when you give out a general one-word description of what the effects should be or what setting you are aiming for the mixture, like “happiness”, “sensual/sexual” and “social”.

@Charles_W

As you will see when some early packs come off embargo, the performance of some MX in the pack varies greatly. Some will be successful, some perhaps less so.

I have noticed that effect already. Some sprays in a pack make me completely hyped up, while others just make me feel like a regular joe with a nice smell. As a tester you just don’t know if it is Androtics trolling me (let’s send him a placebo and see how he reacts) or the mixture being a failure, so I treat every bad mixture (a mixture that does not give me any effects) as a possible placebo and send a report what i did and what I encountered, with the possibility that it is most likely a dud. Its like a reverse lottery… If you got lucky you can yell on the forums that you got one of those annoying placebo’s.

I always send in what I feel and encounter while under the influence of the spray, and if my reports end up being the 5% of statistically impossible answers then I have most likely been doing something wrong, received a placebo or I am faking my reports. But if my reports end up being part of those 80% that claim the spray is a possible dud, then there is something wrong with the mixture.

@Charles_W

It’s not good enough that MX297 work for 200 people (although it does). We’d like to see it work for 200,000 and have a sufficient sample size for high confidence.

Talking about this, I was asking customer support yesterday if there were some possible MX mixes that could need some extra testing, to get some more testers on board? Mixes that you could say have “insufficient data” to get out of embargo and therefore need more people. Don’t mind slipping in an extra mixpack in my cart…

@Charles_W

When a product says “Instant Honesty” it must instantly deliver honesty. This is the rule established by the co. founders. The experiments continue until we know with near certainty the product does as claimed.

We now feel Come Talk To Me does what it says, and we brought it back as a consumer spray with full guarantee.

And I hope that I can see more like this in the future. I agree with the founders on this one. Its only good if it can be backed by scientific facts, and the reason why I love the products. Everyone can claim that their spray attracts girls, but not many pheromone companies can actually make those claims true, similar to selling “snake-oil” vs a product that is proven to work.

[ElijahGuru]

@Charles_W

Answering the question of sample size. I don’t have precise numbers. MX101 was the first real MX. Approx. 9 years ago. MX297 is probably the longest run of continuously stocked MX. It perhaps has the largest and broadest data set of any experimental pheromone product. The number of posts must be in the hundreds. How many exposed targets at a bar or club? Perhaps in the 1000’s.

We have discussed at length ways to move MX from first release to consumer within 2 years. In early days, reports quality was excellent. It began to deteriorate somewhat ca. 2010. The “hype” problem. MX like 301 were “promoted.” Oh, yes, the did show results. But if a prominent figure tells you something does such and such, is it true.

If the man in the lab coat says the pill works, how much is due to the pill and how much to the coat?

We occasionally run placebo or other quality tests. Not often. This is part of our Terms for MX. We make no secret or conspiracy. We also offer whopping discounts, so…

Here’s the real truth of some of the hype: it didn’t stand our quality tests. In some cases, the alleged results did not match up to par with placebo other blind tests anti-bias measures.

Again, we use placebo quite rarely and only when needed to calibrate data.

As you will see when some early packs come off embargo, the performance of some MX in the pack varies greatly. Some will be successful, some perhaps less so.

Therefore, some MX we continue or bring back (MX135, MX353) and some are removed.

If every experiment had no unsuccessful outcomes, it wouldn’t be an experiment.

It’s not good enough that MX297 work for 200 people (although it does). We’d like to see it work for 200,000 and have a sufficient sample size for high confidence.

When a product says “Instant Honesty” it must instantly deliver honesty. This is the rule established by the co. founders. The experiments continue until we know with near certainty the product does as claimed.

We now feel Come Talk To Me does what it says, and we brought it back as a consumer spray with full guarantee.

Our goal is to double the number of Reporting Users in 6 months. All of these will become more affordable, test reports will double, embargoes will end sooner and more MX will become mainstream. We will resvolve the hype and other issues from 2011-2013 now that necessary staffing adjustments are effected.

Could you blame me if I said that I really want the mixes that you guys said you’ll never bring back? There’s this experimental mix that some members are buzzing about…