Hi guys. I’ve been using pheromone products for a few months now and I have noticed a change in the social behavior for myself and those around me as I’m sure you all have as well. However after the subject came up in my anatomy and physiology class today I have to wonder why is it that most empirical scientific studies show that pheromones play no part in human interactions?
I’m not hating on the product guys I just really want to know why this is.
snoop around pubmed.com there is some articles there.
There is also company called pherin looking to make prescription drugs from mones. Although the webpage seems to be very outdated.
Thanks Vega and Maidenfan01 for bringing this up.
That’s a great link, where I found:
Evidence that androstadienone, a putative human ch… [Horm Behav. 2008] - PubMed result
“androstadienone will modulate a woman’s attribution of men’s attractiveness.”
Basically, women will love men with the right mones!!!
Teachers can only teach you what they know and whats in the text books they use which become outdated almost before they are done printing them in the field of science.
Some teachers can be very close minded. (especially college professors) If they didnt learn it when they went to school or its not in the book it can not be so. It really is unfortunate especially in the science and physiology fields because these fields continually and rapidly change.
Google 'human pheromones studies abstracts ’ and look for the current information. This is what my son did in his high school biology class and suddenly the student became the teacher. His teacher ended up calling me very interested in the subject but the sad thing is she told me she couldnt teach the kids anything different then what was in the curriculum or she would get in trouble.
I believe in learning but I dont believe school is the only place it occurs.
Tisha
funny… I guess the studies that prove that androstadieone affects certain areas of the human female brain and the increase in female hormones got it wrong.
There are even newer studies of women being able to tell who a man is while blindfolded after smelling his shirt. In fact they were confused after the men they were tested with exchanged shirts.
This is what I would do if I were you. I would request an opportunity to do a blind test with your class. Honestly, the fun thing about science is disproving it.
Tisha’s right about the teachers only being able to teach from their textbooks.
Those textbooks were probably written at the same time Bohr’s model was law, pluto was a full-sized planet, and the triceratops was still a dinosaur.
Science changes its mind every day.
Wait triceratops isn’t a dinosaur anymore?
I’m with you JosieWilder, when did that happen?!!? He was my favorite dinosaur! Wait, what do I call him now?!?
Gotta update my mental archives as well, see what other scientific data needs modernizing!!!
What the Hell! Why you gotta ruin my day like that? That’s a SICK TWISTED LIE! 
then how come they make conclusions before studying it intensively?
Why bring up the whole subject in the first place if there isn’t enough research to back up their claims?
since there is not much backing up the teachers claims, maybe i should start writing a text book and sell it to schools
I will include the secret’s theories 
OK guys John is bent on destroying our minds. He is EVIL
http://yahoofreak.com/emoticons/Evil%20Emoticons/evil%20crazy.png
I suppose next you’re going to tell us Pluto isn’t a planet
Well I’ll concede that my professor can only teach from the textbook and in fact he has had to look up info for questions that he couldn’t answer in class. The book however is from 2009 so it is new. However I will admit that at the time it was being written and then published new research may have come out in support of mones. I don’t know. I myself have reaped the benefits of mones and I was just wondering why there is still so much skepticism.
Oh thats easy. It scares people. It scares them to think that we natrually produce something that can tell others who we are and what we are about. It scares them to think that we can naturally produce something to influence them that they have no control over.
Basically if you think about it that is what skepticism is. The fear that you may have to change what you believe and untimately change the way you see the world or the world see’s you.
Tisha
Well I’ll buy that for the average Joe but a scientist? Usually they’re the one that give you the hard facts despite how one may feel about them.
Scientists are human like the rest of us. They may not be afraid of what I mentioned above but they are afraid. Maybe its being wrong, what there peers will think of them or maybe its just having to change what they always believed. People are afraid of different things but fear is still fear.
Believe me my brother is a scientist and I scare the crap out of him LOL Being what I am, I represent what he cant prove or explain.
Tisha
Most teachers will only teach from their textbooks because they WROTE the textbook. Go to any major college or university and the required reading is most likely to be your own professors book (which will cost an arm and a leg on top of your tuition).
On something like the science of pheromones very few institutions would be willing to put forth the funding to actually do a series of double blind placebo controlled studies.
For one, because the science is so looked down upon by the main scientific community that they fear being ridiculed, and secondly it crosses many other sciences that it’s a science branch unto itself.
You’d need a level of education in evolutionary biology, endocrinology, sociology, psychology (perhaps with an emphasis on human sexuality), bio chemistry etc.
Since we’d be talking about biochemicals, designed by evolution to communicate qualities about ourselves that will effect social interactions by effecting peoples perceptions of us on a subconscious level. Once you deal with something having a subconscious effect that in and of itself makes it questionable…some people don’t even acknowledge the effect of hypnosis or subliminal messages. You’re combining an objective hard science with a subjective social science.