# Pheromones a myth in mammals **URL:** \ **Category:** Studies & Abstracts\ **Created:** [November 15, 2010, 9:05pm UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/pheromones-a-myth-in-mammals/43328 "2010-11-15T21:05:22Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![SteveO](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/87869e/32.png) [@SteveO](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/SteveO)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2010, 9:05pm UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/pheromones-a-myth-in-mammals/43328/1 "2010-11-15T21:05:22Z")
[Penn Current: Research: Pheromones a myth in mammals](http://www.upenn.edu/pennnews/current/research/111110.html) Something just didn’t smell right to [Richard Doty.](http://www.med.upenn.edu/stc/staff/doty.html) It was 1976 when the director of the Smell and Taste Center at Penn’s School of Medicine first started raising a stink about the existence of [pheromones](https://pheromonelabs.com/shop/). When his latest book, “The Great Pheromone Myth,” was released earlier this year, it reignited the debate over the science of these supposed smells. Even the definition of the word is controversial. Generally defined as a biological chemical that induces a well-defined response in the same animal, the concept of pheromones in mammals has been around since the late 1950s. The term has lingered in both scientific circles and pop culture since then. We’ve all heard tales of how pheromones cause sparks to fly between people who almost subconsciously follow their noses even before their hearts toward a potential sweetheart. There’s only one problem: According to Doty, mammals (in contrast to insects), do not have pheromones. “The pheromone term seems to have mainly attracted perfume manufacturers and people looking for the fountain of youth,” Doty says. “It’s just not the way things are. It would be like saying a particular color is why we choose a mate. That’s just not how relationships are formed.” The fallacy of the pheromone is not a position Doty has carved out only recently. He has spent decades researching the chemical senses (smell and taste) from both basic and clinical perspectives. “We looked at the literature relative to the set of criteria that would distinguish a pheromone from a chemical,” says Doty, a professor in the [School of Medicine’s Department of Otorhinolaryngology](http://www.uphs.upenn.edu/pennorl/). “In reality, almost everything you could show [illustrates] that almost all the situations of changed behavior were learned. Animals are very good at learning the meaning of chemicals.” Doty objects to the idea that a single chemical emitted by one mammal can induce a behavioral change in another of the same species, and therefore little or no more scientific study about the cause and effect of the relationship is needed. “It’s an oversimplification of how chemicals work in the environment and how animals are affected by them,” he says. “People have oversimplified the nature of the olfactory system. It’s the brain that interprets what meaning is. Conditioning plays a very significant role in all aspects of human and mammal behavior.” Though it deals with a testy topic, Doty’s book generally has been received well. “‘The Great Pheromone Myth’ is a lovely mural of important developmental questions and phenomena,” reads a recent review in Developmental Psychobiology. “The book is also an excellent guide to a field of inquiry, a conceptual framework and an admirable product of scholarship. It offers much to professionals and advanced students in a wide range of sensory, behavioral, ecological, physiological and even clinical fields.” Those who’ve criticized Doty’s book range from the militantly pro-pheromone, many of whom Doty says have stated they will not read it, to those who say the whole argument is a tussle over semantics. “It’s erroneous to infer that all these mammalian behaviors are determined in an invariant way by a single response to a single chemical,” Doty says. “It’s not just semantics, it’s the whole conceptualization.” Doty has spent countless hours throughout his career working to debunk myths surrounding pheromones. This book may be his crowning achievement, yet the concept seems to never dissipate. “People want [pheromones] to exist,” he says. “It’s part of our need as humans to have belief in the unknown. We have the need to believe that certain things are happening beyond our senses.” ---
**Author:** ![Bella](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/pheromonetalk.com/bella/32/1738_2.png) [@Bella](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/Bella)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2010, 9:59pm UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/pheromones-a-myth-in-mammals/43328/2 "2010-11-15T21:59:56Z")
Yeah, I read this, lol. Doty’s book may have been “well recieved” by those who are un/misinformed. Though he actually contradicts himself. Whack-a-do-whack-a-do-whack-a-do. 🙄 Bella ---
**Author:** ![SteveO](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/87869e/32.png) [@SteveO](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/SteveO)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2010, 10:06pm UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/pheromones-a-myth-in-mammals/43328/3 "2010-11-15T22:06:36Z")
I hope its available on Kindle. I’m interested in what he has to offer ---
**Author:** ![Vespero](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/pheromonetalk.com/vespero/32/988_2.png) [@Vespero](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/Vespero)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2010, 10:17pm UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/pheromones-a-myth-in-mammals/43328/4 "2010-11-15T22:17:29Z")
I don’t understand what the problem is. Yes, the brain mediates behavior to a large extent, particularly in mammals with more complex brains, e.g., humans, but that doesn’t mean there is no effect. We are not claiming that some [pheromone](https://pheromonelabs.com/) will instantly send a woman into a mating frenzy, but it amplifies or diminishes certain mental states, which may affect the mediating action taken by the conscious mind by presenting it with different levels of stimuli. Even if these behavioral responses are only learned, it certainly seems they have been learned to the point of being integrated into the subconscious and are employed automatically to an extent. At this point, what does it matter whether they are congenital or learned? They can still be used to send chemical signals. ---
**Author:** ![AplAy](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/pheromonetalk.com/aplay/32/1054_2.png) [@AplAy](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/AplAy)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2010, 10:23pm UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/pheromones-a-myth-in-mammals/43328/5 "2010-11-15T22:23:27Z")
I agree that pheromones do not seem to have magical effects, which can be observed in insects such as ants. But there is clearly something going on though because when my family’s girl-dog is ovulating the male dogs get all crazy and it’s not in their genes to know that “she is in the month”, it is in their genes to being able to SMELL the signals she is sending. Now, not all male dogs get all crazy about her. She becomes a bitch to our puppy female. Also if pheromones did not exist in mammals then how would mr Doty explain discovered chemicals like androsterone, androstenol and androstadienone??? Now, one thing I think is important now so new member do not get discouraged by this article is to actually let people who are using “pheromones” to share their stories because real-life examples are the best thing ever; after all science tries to discover the real world, not the imaginationland like south park (LOOOL, luv that episode IMAGINIATIIOON!) \\ AplAy /// **P.S.** I have already observed facilitating effects in combining AMMO with [Instant Shine](https://a314.com/product/shine/) so I rest my case to Mr Doty who flashes his PhD-diploma! ---
**Author:** ![SteveO](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/87869e/32.png) [@SteveO](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/SteveO)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2010, 12:32am UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/pheromones-a-myth-in-mammals/43328/6 "2010-11-16T00:32:56Z")
> [@AplAy](#): > > I agree that pheromones do not seem to have magical effects, which can be > observed in insects such as ants. But there is clearly something going on > though because when my family’s girl-dog is ovulating the male dogs get all > crazy and it’s not in their genes to know that “she is in the month”, it is in > their genes to being able to SMELL the signals she is sending. Now, not all > male dogs get all crazy about her. She becomes a bitch to our puppy female. > > Also if pheromones did not exist in mammals then how would mr Doty explain > discovered chemicals like androsterone, androstenol and androstadienone??? > > Now, one thing I think is important now so new member do not get > discouraged by this article is to actually let people who are using > “pheromones” to share their stories because real-life examples are the > best thing ever; after all science tries to discover the real world, not the > imaginationland like south park (LOOOL, luv that episode IMAGINIATIIOON!) > > \\ AplAy /// > > **P.S.** I have already observed facilitating effects in combining AMMO with > Instant Shine so I rest my case to Mr Doty who flashes his PhD-diploma! That’s actually why I posted here, in regards to new members. I feel its invaluable for both sides of the coin to be shown and disseminated information for accurate, open and honest discussions to take place. I’d rather a new person read this here than see it in the news and turn away before ever exploring the opportunity as it is presented. I would actually love to read pro-arguments from his view point.😉 ---
**Author:** ![RisenAlpha](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/54ee81/32.png) [@RisenAlpha](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/RisenAlpha)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2010, 4:21am UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/pheromones-a-myth-in-mammals/43328/7 "2010-11-16T04:21:02Z")
This is what annoys me: “Doty objects to the idea that a single chemical emitted by one mammal can induce a behavioral change in another of the same species, and therefore little or no more scientific study about the cause and effect of the relationship is needed.” Well that’s pretty subjective isn’t it? It can’t possibly exist, therefore we have no reason to test it. Yet other test show that it does exist and there are changes in behaviors. There are test done with lab rats that prove they use pheromones. Aren’t the mammals? ---
**Author:** ![Vespero](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/pheromonetalk.com/vespero/32/988_2.png) [@Vespero](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/Vespero)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2010, 5:10am UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/pheromones-a-myth-in-mammals/43328/8 "2010-11-16T05:10:52Z")
I also found that line patently ridiculous, especially since it makes it sound as if his opinion is the end-all-be-all. It’s as if a scientist were to say “Well, personally I think gravity doesn’t really exist. I mean, come on, look at birds. Planes? I know you guys have spent a bunch of resources on this and have your own evidence, but this should about cover it. That’s all.” A lot of science is complex, especially while it’s still in its formulative stages. Yes, eventually everything might (or might not) simplify down to something as simple as Newton’s laws or the everywhere-known e=mc^2, but for most of the process beforehand, everyone is going to be waist-deep in some pretty technical and confusing shit. If we called off scientific investigations anytime someone objected, even if they had substantial evidence to support their side, we would be nowhere. Van’t Hoff proposed the tetrahedral bonding scheme of carbon atoms long before a lot of people even thought molecules existed in three dimensions (they thought all the atoms lay in a plane, not that they were actually flat and two-dimensional). People called him ridiculous and in some circles, he lost a lot of credibility. Guess what? Tetrahedral bonding by carbon and other atoms leads to incredible diversity of organic molecules that make life possible. Tetrahedral geometry makes possible chirality and the various properties of molecules that come with it. By Doty’s logic, we should have just dismissed the entire thing completely and have a completely skewed view of chemical interactions. Anyway, I meant to comment on that line initially, as it is completely ludicrous, but I got distracted. It happens. ---
**Author:** ![Kilekoopie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/bc79bd/32.png) [@Kilekoopie](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/Kilekoopie)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2010, 8:57am UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/pheromones-a-myth-in-mammals/43328/9 "2010-11-16T08:57:08Z")
Just look at deer season. All the glands they have to rub their scent and mones around during rut, I wanna read this book and see what he says about it. I appreciate you posting this here, it shows how open we are to others ideas and let others have a say so it’s not all one sided. ---
**Author:** ![Vespero](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/pheromonetalk.com/vespero/32/988_2.png) [@Vespero](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/Vespero)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2010, 2:48pm UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/pheromones-a-myth-in-mammals/43328/10 "2010-11-16T14:48:21Z")
> [@Kilekoopie](#): > > Just look at deer season. All the glands they have to rub their scent and mones around during rut, I wanna read this book and see what he says about it. I appreciate you posting this here, it shows how open we are to others ideas and let others have a say so it’s not all one sided. I was going to mention that as well, but wasn’t sure of the technical details or validity of that argument, and so didn’t want to mention it if it was completely wrong, so thanks. I wonder if you kept a female deer in captivity from birth and away from any agents that could teach her the “proper” response to detecting musk from a male deer, and then introduced the musk to her, would she elicit a sexual response, or some response, even if it wasn’t the proper sexual one? If you could ensure that she couldn’t have learned such behavior, this would be evidence for chemical communication in mammals, at least of the rucervine variety. ---
**Author:** ![Maidenfan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e9bcb4/32.png) [@Maidenfan01](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/Maidenfan01)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2010, 2:45am UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/pheromones-a-myth-in-mammals/43328/11 "2010-11-20T02:45:36Z")
I think that the huge problem with people that are ant-pheromone is that they expect it to act the same way it does in insects or other non-mammals. In humans pheromones simply do not force behavior the way the might in other species. However, anyone that has been experimenting for a while has seen everything from blatant hits to subtle changes. However, we do not see any behavior that happens the same everytime. I guess what I am trying to get at is that the arguement is more over the term pheromone and what we expect it to do, not whether these molecules have effect or not, because they do, and they have scientific evidence to show that they do. ---
**Author:** ![AplAy](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/pheromonetalk.com/aplay/32/1054_2.png) [@AplAy](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/AplAy)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2010, 8:38pm UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/pheromones-a-myth-in-mammals/43328/12 "2010-11-20T20:38:43Z")
Í totally agree with you, Maidenfan01; pheromones seem to have “facilitating effects”, not “causing effects” and studies even indicate that in some contexts certain pheromones have amplifying effects on sexual arousal and mood enhancement, while in other contexts they do not (and then they have also counted in ovulation variables). So, ye mones do help, not magically and I never expected them either, but they do facilitate stuff in certain contexts and if they do, I prefer use them instead of some bullshit french perfume… \\ AplAy /// ---
**Author:** ![jvkohl](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/pheromonetalk.com/jvkohl/32/1297_2.png) [@jvkohl](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/jvkohl)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2010, 1:24am UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/pheromones-a-myth-in-mammals/43328/13 "2010-11-28T01:24:09Z")
I started a thread last March about Doty’s book, “The Great Pheromone Myth.” There was some good discussion then also with similar conclusions. Despite our differences, he and I are still friends so far as I’m concerned. A few other researchers, but very few, supported what he said in his book. By redefining the term pheromones to make it fit unreasonable restrictions, he made a case that mammalian pheromones don’t exist. We all know they do, which begs the question of why Doty did not mention anything I’ve published: a book; book chapter; three journal articles. And how could he miss two presentations to the Association for Chemoreception Sciences where my colleagues and I presented evidence that a mixture of two chemicals increased flirtatious behavior (and in a second study: increased self reported levels of attraction). These results were observed in and reported after a 15 minute interaction. And the abstracts are in the Associations archives. I’m rather certain you’ll hear more about the studies soon, but I don’t plan to publish our findings until they are (or are not) independently replicated. James V. Kohl [ScentofEros.com](http://ScentofEros.com) > [@Vespero](#): > > I was going to mention that as well, but wasn’t sure of the technical details or validity of that argument, and so didn’t want to mention it if it was completely wrong, so thanks. I wonder if you kept a female deer in captivity from birth and away from any agents that could teach her the “proper” response to detecting musk from a male deer, and then introduced the musk to her, would she elicit a sexual response, or some response, even if it wasn’t the proper sexual one? If you could ensure that she couldn’t have learned such behavior, this would be evidence for chemical communication in mammals, at least of the rucervine variety. ---
**Author:** ![SteveO](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/87869e/32.png) [@SteveO](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/SteveO)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2010, 1:39am UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/pheromones-a-myth-in-mammals/43328/14 "2010-11-28T01:39:09Z")
Here’s the Link James wrote about above for anyone interested: [https://pheromonetalk.com/t/the-pheromone-myth/36706](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/the-pheromone-myth/36706) ---
**Author:** ![jvkohl](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/pheromonetalk.com/jvkohl/32/1297_2.png) [@jvkohl](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/jvkohl)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2010, 2:37am UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/pheromones-a-myth-in-mammals/43328/15 "2010-11-28T02:37:47Z")
I was looking for the info on isolation last evening and ran across a recent study that mentioned the innate response that Doty says doesn’t exist in mammals, but it does in rabbit pups delivered by C-section. The article is technically written, but I wanted to show others that Doty missed a lot of available information that extends to humans. see [Mammary olfactory signalisation in females and odo… [Behav Brain Res. 2009] - PubMed result](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19374020) I have become friends with one of the co-authors of this article, after speaking with him about his works (and about Doty’s misrepresentations). No excuses for Doty not to be aware of this research, as he attends at least one of the annual meetings that I attend–where this research was presented or discussed prior to publication (as is most of the “real” research on pheromones). What most people read is from data that’s a year to three year’s old, as are the studies that my colleagues and I did and presented. From page 350 of the publication (abstract linked above) “Postnatal or natal learning was ruled out in testing pups deprived of 2MB2 exposure (i.e., separated from the mother after caesarean delivery). Further, the facts that amniotic fluid and pregnant female’s blood were behaviourally ineffective, and that 2MB2 could not be traced in these substrates by GC-MS [138], suggests that its activity may not derive from prenatal induction. It was only after we obtained the above set of results verifying the criteria proposed by Beauchamp et al. [9] and Johnston [72] that we dared qualifying 2MB2 from rabbit milk as a pheromone.” I think this goes to show that even some well-respected researchers, like Doty, get the wrong idea from researchers whose works are disregarded, like Winnifred Cutler with her marketing of the Athena products. Doty had talked about writing a book about pheromones from the time I first met him, many years ago. I think he just waited too long to write it, and did not keep up with the research. Cutler, on the other hand, simply dropped out of sight from other researchers, which Doty notes in his book, although he doesn’t mention her by name. Same thing with the folks from David Berliner’s group Erox / Pherin / [Human Pheromone](https://pheromonelabs.com/) Sciences (e.g., with the Realm and Natural Attraction products). It’s not easy to have a product and keep your scientific reputation in tact so that your research is considered valid. But I’ve done it! James V. Kohl [ScentofEros.com](http://ScentofEros.com) > [@Vespero](#): > > I was going to mention that as well, but wasn’t sure of the technical details or validity of that argument, and so didn’t want to mention it if it was completely wrong, so thanks. I wonder if you kept a female deer in captivity from birth and away from any agents that could teach her the “proper” response to detecting musk from a male deer, and then introduced the musk to her, would she elicit a sexual response, or some response, even if it wasn’t the proper sexual one? If you could ensure that she couldn’t have learned such behavior, this would be evidence for chemical communication in mammals, at least of the rucervine variety. ---
**Author:** ![AplAy](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/pheromonetalk.com/aplay/32/1054_2.png) [@AplAy](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/AplAy)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2010, 3:38pm UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/pheromones-a-myth-in-mammals/43328/16 "2010-11-28T15:38:41Z")
> [@jvkohl](#): > > I have become friends with one of the co-authors of this article, after speaking with him about his works (and about Doty’s misrepresentations). No excuses for Doty not to be aware of this research, as he attends at least one of the annual meetings that I attend–where this research was presented or discussed prior to publication (as is most of the “real” research on pheromones). What most people read is from data that’s a year to three year’s old, as are the studies that my colleagues and I did and presented. > > From page 350 of the publication (abstract linked above) “Postnatal or natal learning was ruled out in testing pups deprived of 2MB2 exposure (i.e., separated from the mother after caesarean delivery). Further, the facts that amniotic fluid and pregnant female’s blood were behaviourally ineffective, and that 2MB2 could not be traced in these substrates by GC-MS [138], suggests that its activity may not derive from prenatal induction. It was only after we obtained the above set of results verifying the criteria proposed by Beauchamp et al. [9] and Johnston [72] that we dared qualifying 2MB2 from rabbit milk as a pheromone.” > > I think this goes to show that even some well-respected researchers, like Doty, get the wrong idea from researchers whose works are disregarded, like Winnifred Cutler with her marketing of the Athena products. Doty had talked about writing a book about pheromones from the time I first met him, many years ago. I think he just waited too long to write it, and did not keep up with the research. Cutler, on the other hand, simply dropped out of sight from other researchers, which Doty notes in his book, although he doesn’t mention her by name. Same thing with the folks from David Berliner’s group Erox / Pherin / Human Pheromone Sciences (e.g., with the Realm and Natural Attraction products). > > It’s not easy to have a product and keep your scientific reputation in tact so that your research is considered valid. But I’ve done it! > > James V. Kohl > [ScentofEros.com](http://ScentofEros.com) Damn man! You’re a REAL researcher! That’s awesome. I’m just getting my bachelor degree right now. Another example of people who seems to be under influence of the Confirmation Bias is the female author of The Female Brain book where she doesn’t understand how she is using scientific facts and she is clearly trying to bash on men which she keeps doing in her The Male Brain book as well. It’s sad that some researcher are driven by this… \\ AplAy /// ---
**Author:** ![jvkohl](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/pheromonetalk.com/jvkohl/32/1297_2.png) [@jvkohl](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/jvkohl)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2010, 5:26pm UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/pheromones-a-myth-in-mammals/43328/17 "2010-11-28T17:26:49Z")
Thanks. Many researchers, like Doty, have an agenda (e.g., Confirmation Bias). To prevent mine from interfering with research results, I help with study design and facts but am not directly involved in data collection. You will be interested to learn that the last series of studies I was involved with were executed by an undergraduate who is now pursuing a doctorate degree in medicine. The studies were done under the professorship of a colleague with funding from a consultant position I briefly held. For an unbiased look at the brain, you might want to read Bruce McEwen’s “The hostage brain.” Also, every so often I thank the owners of this Forum for encouraging my participation. In contrast, the Love-Scent Forum banned me after first trying to limit the amount of scientific information (and thereby dispute) I was contributing through my posts. James V. Kohl Clinical Laboratory Scientist search [scholar.google.com](http://scholar.google.com) > [@AplAy](#): > > Damn man! You’re a REAL researcher! That’s awesome. I’m just getting my > bachelor degree right now. Another example of people who seems to be > under influence of the Confirmation Bias is the female author of The Female > Brain book where she doesn’t understand how she is using scientific facts > and she is clearly trying to bash on men which she keeps doing in her The > Male Brain book as well. It’s sad that some researcher are driven by this… > > \\ AplAy /// ---
**Author:** ![AplAy](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/pheromonetalk.com/aplay/32/1054_2.png) [@AplAy](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/AplAy)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2010, 6:16pm UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/pheromones-a-myth-in-mammals/43328/18 "2010-11-28T18:16:59Z")
Indeed! That is why I love my university, the first lesson in scientific thinking we learned about that some researchers are biased towards their own agendas and that some research is aided by company to create more authority to sell their products. I hate people who misuses science this way. For example, from what I have heard (which might be incorrect), is that some research on drugs such as marijuana is propaganda to ban it and that the original research showed no negative effects of using it and thus the classical statement, “There has never been any report of death due to overdoses of marijuana”. However, that remains to still be investigated… I am also now trying to figure out my own agenda since I do love the positivism-perspective of research (I am very against social constructionism-perspective of research although I do love the field of psychology and its subfields). I do think I am partially biased towards confirming that biology triumfs over culture influences in the long run. My reasoning is simple this, “If people create their own world that could not otherwise exist, what were their motives? Why did they use one way thus to define reality and not another way?” and here I believe biology do influence alot how we choose to define, create and act in “the real world”. Now, that was alot of off-topic but I love philosophy of science, LOL! I have learned that university don’t only help you to get job, but it helps you to THINK CRITICALLY of the world around you as well, which is just great! \\ AplAy /// **P.S.** R you still involved in some upcoming research, and if you are, in which journals? > [@jvkohl](#): > > Thanks. Many researchers, like Doty, have an agenda (e.g., Confirmation Bias). To prevent mine from interfering with research results, I help with study design and facts but am not directly involved in data collection. You will be interested to learn that the last series of studies I was involved with were executed by an undergraduate who is now pursuing a doctorate degree in medicine. The studies were done under the professorship of a colleague with funding from a consultant position I briefly held. For an unbiased look at the brain, you might want to read Bruce McEwen’s “The hostage brain.” > > Also, every so often I thank the owners of this Forum for encouraging my participation. In contrast, the Love-Scent Forum banned me after first trying to limit the amount of scientific information (and thereby dispute) I was contributing through my posts. > > James V. Kohl > Clinical Laboratory Scientist > search [scholar.google.com](http://scholar.google.com) ---
**Author:** ![jvkohl](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/pheromonetalk.com/jvkohl/32/1297_2.png) [@jvkohl](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/jvkohl)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2010, 8:30pm UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/pheromones-a-myth-in-mammals/43328/19 "2010-11-28T20:30:03Z")
I’m happy to hear that your university got you off to a good start. In contrast, I was once told by the director of an institute of higher learning that I could have advanced standing and get my Ph.D. in 3 trimesters. What followed was his dictate that I would not be studying human pheromones, because there was no such thing (circa 1991). At about the same time, evidence was arriving in publications from what became a commercial marketing group selling products that supposedly contained human pheromones that acted through a “sixth sense” (e.g., a functional human VNO, which does not exist). Some of the group’s research came from their association with the University of Utah as I recall. Arguably, the decision makers there were taken in, like I was, before research claims were examined by experts in the field. [Pheromone research](https://pheromonelabs.com/) is probably the best was to link biology and psychology, especially because new findings consistently help to detail the links from pheromones to hormones and behavior across species. With regard to the philosophy of science, you may want to read Greg Bear’s address to the American Philosophical Society “When genes go walkabout.” And see his domain: [GregBear.com](http://GregBear.com) for some added perspective on this. As noted, he sucessfully predicted the involvement of human endogenous retroviruses in speciation, but get this; he did it in science fiction novels where a new subspecies of humans began to redefine their world. You’ll no doubt enjoy how he incorporates pheromones into his excellent works of fiction. Also, your mind will be prepared for what’s coming from research on epigenetics (the latest ventures). I’m not actively involved in any current research, but have become tempted to publish a review or even results from completed research. If you don’t hear about anything new from me via this or other groups where I participate, it probably means I put the future on hold. Sometimes, the best philosophy of science is to take a break and let others catch up. Sooner or later, other researchers and marketers will need to look at the results from controlled studies that are not cloaked in secrecy about the compounds used or manipulations of data that allow them to make magical claims. James V. Kohl > [@AplAy](#): > > Indeed! That is why I love my university, the first lesson in scientific > thinking we learned about that some researchers are biased towards their > own agendas and that some research is aided by company to create more > authority to sell their products. I hate people who misuses science this way. > > For example, from what I have heard (which might be incorrect), is that > some research on drugs such as marijuana is propaganda to ban it and that > the original research showed no negative effects of using it and thus the > classical statement, “There has never been any report of death due to > overdoses of marijuana”. However, that remains to still be investigated… > > I am also now trying to figure out my own agenda since I do love the > positivism-perspective of research (I am very against social > constructionism-perspective of research although I do love the field of > psychology and its subfields). I do think I am partially biased towards > confirming that biology triumfs over culture influences in the long run. > > My reasoning is simple this, “If people create their own world that could > not otherwise exist, what were their motives? Why did they use one way > thus to define reality and not another way?” and here I believe biology do > influence alot how we choose to define, create and act in “the real world”. > > Now, that was alot of off-topic but I love philosophy of science, LOL! I > have learned that university don’t only help you to get job, but it helps you > to THINK CRITICALLY of the world around you as well, which is just great! > > \\ AplAy /// > > **P.S.** R you still involved in some upcoming > research, and if you are, in which journals? ---
**Author:** ![jvkohl](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/pheromonetalk.com/jvkohl/32/1297_2.png) [@jvkohl](https://pheromonetalk.com/u/jvkohl)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2010, 6:01pm UTC](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/pheromones-a-myth-in-mammals/43328/20 "2010-12-08T18:01:25Z")
This article came up again on several discussion groups “Pheromones a myth in mammals.” December 2nd, 2010. [Pheromones a myth in mammals](http://www.physorg.com/news/2010-12-pheromones-myth-mammals.html) It’s disappointing to me that it’s getting so much coverage, because some people might take it for the truth. I’ve commented at the link above. James V. Kohl [Next page](https://pheromonetalk.com/t/pheromones-a-myth-in-mammals/43328.md?page=2)