Those who are interested in the latest research might be interested in the full text of this journal article / book chapter.

Adrenaline injection increased androsterone, which helps to explain why it's and indicator of masculinity. The adrenal glands kick in when we're in a fight or flight situation, and the extra androsterone is a very likely signal of a winner.

Not much other information on androsterone, because the article is about the androstenes: androstadienone, androstenone, androstenol. If you want to see what researchers think about these chemicals, here's your chance. It's the best review of the research that I've seen.

http://pcwww.liv.ac.uk/~scr/pdf/2010_And...review.pdf

James V. Kohl
http://www.pheromones.com

Interesting read!
That review makes a pretty good case for androstadienone, and androstenone the obvious one to be left out of the mix.
I can see your reasoning after reading that for not being keen on androstenone, unless you want women to sit in a particular dentist chair lol.

According to that article the proven ingredients seem to be:
Androstadienone, Androstenol, Androsterone and no androstenone

Yet the whole pheromone industry sells the vast majority of products on androstenone content with claims of proven research. Very weird indeed.

Not that I would place all my trust in any one book regardless of who wrote it (and nobel prizes dont impress me either), but it makes the analytical person think twice about it.
The other problem being the non disclosure of most of the other ingredients to add to the confusion.

I'm glad you took the time to read it and enjoyed your humor about the dentist's chair. I may want to incorporate that joke into my writings. If you want me to credit you with it, send me a PM. I convinced my dentist to use fragrance in his office many years ago, to ease tension. Nothing pheromonal, just aromatherapy.

Normally, like you, I would not put much faith in the impression I got from one article, but this review is much more comprehensive than most, and I did not detect any bias, which is apparent in the writings from other groups with research interests -- even mine. I can speculate that this group has studies in progress, perhaps of androstadienone, but I've also discussed replication of our results with them (i.e., with Lenochova and Havlicek), and have already sent the mixture of chemicals from our studies to Oberzaucher and Grammer for attempted replication.

That's part of what is expected to happen in the scientific community. We are definitely on to something, and others become interested when they see our work presented. For example: Lenochova, P. Havlicek, J. Oberzaucher, E. Grammer, K. (2008) Do perfumes mask or interact with body odour? International Society for Human Ethology. Bologna, Italy. July 13 - 17.

Next, we may see androstadienone fall out of favor, because no one has shown that it has any behavioral affect. Like androstenone, however, it has been heavily marketed and conceptualized as a human pheromone. However, it's species specificity and appropriate use of physiological rather than supraphysiological amounts for empirical testing has not been addressed except in the critical review by Wysocki and Preti.

I think that I mentioned the issue of non-disclosure in another post. If you don't disclose methods and what you're using, you don't present results at conferences, which is the only way your scientifically-minded peers can evaluate your research. If there is scientific support for the use of androstenone, I haven't seen it.

Reports that androstadienone has a similar odor to androstenone made me ask why so many groups are testing it. The answer, a few years ago, was because everyone else is. To their credit, however, other researchers are likely to be influenced by the claims from those who use commercial products, as we all are. The problem then becomes how to properly design a study that could show a true affect, if any is to be found. We began using my study design in 2000, and another group used it in 2008 in an experiment with androstadienone. They found no affect on flirtatious behavior in women.
See # 511 at http://www.achems.org/files/public/ISOTABSTRACT.pdf

James V. Kohl
http://www.pheromones.com

(01-04-2011 8:09 AM)Pheroman Wrote:  Interesting read!
That review makes a pretty good case for androstadienone, and androstenone the obvious one to be left out of the mix.
I can see your reasoning after reading that for not being keen on androstenone, unless you want women to sit in a particular dentist chair lol.

According to that article the proven ingredients seem to be:
Androstadienone, Androstenol, Androsterone and no androstenone

Yet the whole pheromone industry sells the vast majority of products on androstenone content with claims of proven research. Very weird indeed.

Not that I would place all my trust in any one book regardless of who wrote it (and nobel prizes dont impress me either), but it makes the analytical person think twice about it.
The other problem being the non disclosure of most of the other ingredients to add to the confusion.

lol James, your more than welcome to use it (and any other one). Geez you take the time to post your stuff here, least i can do.

You mention Androstadienone may fall out of favour, but that articles states
"Lundstro¨m et al. (2006) reported
that women’s sensitivity to androstadienone was higher in the fertile phase
than in the luteal phase. They suggested that this was linked to the potential
functional role of androstadienone in mate choice"
and
"women exposed to androstadienone
masked in clove oil (to avoid possible detection of androstadienone)
rated the men they interacted with as more attractive than did
women exposed to clove oil alone"
and a few other mentions which seem to suggest that something may be
happening with exposure, including some negatives like
"After 6 min, androstadienone and estratetraenol were associated with increased positive mood in women, and decreased mood in men."
No point getting a woman hot if you end up swinging a hose.
And if Androstenol achieves a positive mood in a woman without affecting men, there seems no need to use anything else (back to my AV-PMS post). And those studies dont seem to address if anything can be used to counter the effect the negative male effect.
Which pretty much leaves Androstenol & Androsterone as the best androstenes to make a consistent positive impact, based on that research.
But still tons of questions and not many answers.
And whilst I come from an engineering background and have no trouble reading long technical articles, I'll think I'll leave others to do the research and just buy the products lol.

What I did want to ask you is did you have any role in developing
Max Attraction? And what is it's difference to Scent of Eros ?

The reason I think that androstadienone may fall out of favor is because unpublished research (2008) indicated it had no effect on women's flirtatious behaviors. They used a study design that was very similar to ours, and found an effect of menstrual cycle phase on behavior (as we did). The difference is that we found behavioral affects with androstenol/androsterone, that they did not find with androstadienone. People have waited a long time for someone to show behavioral affects, and the research should begin to turn in the direction of where they have been found, as opposed to continued attempts to show behavioral affects with some unlikely chemical (initially promoted for its ability to effect the non-functional human VNO).

(01-05-2011 10:29 AM)Pheroman Wrote:  ... if Androstenol achieves a positive mood in a woman without affecting men, there seems no need to use anything else...

Unless you want to affect behavior. It's the use of androsterone that seems to have the affect on behavior, which is logical because of its individual human-specific, and more generally primate-specific origin.

(01-05-2011 10:29 AM)Pheroman Wrote:  Which pretty much leaves Androstenol & Androsterone as the best androstenes to make a consistent positive impact, based on that research.

There ya go! Except, technically, androsterone is a C-17, not a C-19 steroid. But the research shows more than just a positive impact on mood. The combination translates to positive affects on women's flirtatious behavior and their self-reported levels of attraction.

(01-05-2011 10:29 AM)Pheroman Wrote:  But still tons of questions and not many answers.
And whilst I come from an engineering background and have no trouble reading long technical articles, I'll think I'll leave others to do the research and just buy the products

That's obviously what most people are going to do. It's nice to see someone take a bit more interest in the science an attempt to ensure the product's effectiveness.

(01-05-2011 10:29 AM)Pheroman Wrote:  What I did want to ask you is did you have any role in developing
Max Attraction?

Not directly. But they certainly have followed my research.

(01-05-2011 10:29 AM)Pheroman Wrote:  And what is it's difference to Scent of Eros?

I'm not sure, and not sure it matters. My endorsement is designed to support those who have consistently taken the high ground.

James V. Kohl
http://www.pheromones.com

Hi James,
when you conduct testing do you take into account any pheromones/Androstenes naturally produced?
Is there an easy way of measuring or detecting type and amount naturally produced?
And of course do or could you measure how it interacts with the added chemicals?

I ask this because after many years of my own observations I've many times had what people here call
"ghost effect", Deer in the headlights, Rockstar etc without using any added substances.
And I mentioned before that the first time I used unscented nude and Lucky 7, they were not new smells (Scent of Eros as well).
So if I'm already having a "ghost effect" or rockstar how will the added pheromones work and interact?

thanks

We used the same student male in our studies of the androsterone / androstenol mix. His age and body build probably characterize someone with a natural masculine scent signature. When he was wearing the mix, flirtatious behaviors increased and so did ratings of attraction. This suggests additive affects on behavior, even when starting with a man who probably had no difficulty attracting women without the pheromones.

I experienced what you call the ghost effect when I was younger, and a few women even told me how much they liked my natural scent (and they also acted on their attraction). That's just the typical 'chemistry' or not. I've enjoyed adding to my natural chemical appeal since about age 35, even though I might have done just fine without the addition. Who knows what I might have missed? Why miss any of it? I believe in better living through chemistry.

James V. Kohl
scentoferos.com

(01-27-2011 8:24 AM)Pheroman Wrote:  Hi James,
when you conduct testing do you take into account any pheromones/Androstenes naturally produced?
Is there an easy way of measuring or detecting type and amount naturally produced?
And of course do or could you measure how it interacts with the added chemicals?

I ask this because after many years of my own observations I've many times had what people here call
"ghost effect", Deer in the headlights, Rockstar etc without using any added substances.
And I mentioned before that the first time I used unscented nude and Lucky 7, they were not new smells (Scent of Eros as well).
So if I'm already having a "ghost effect" or rockstar how will the added pheromones work and interact?

thanks

Quote:However, it's species specificity and appropriate use of physiological rather than supraphysiological amounts for empirical testing has not been addressed except in the critical review by Wysocki and Preti.

Whilst I agree that testing for "species specificity" is of great importance, I'm pretty sure in my own testing that these products I used are not "species exclusive".
The most consistent reaction I get are from female dogs, as in four legs and go "woof woof" (thou some human women do that too at times lol).
I often hear is "she usually barks at strangers".

Of course it could be jut a coincidence, but it's never not happened.

(02-10-2011 4:47 AM)Pheroman Wrote:  The most consistent reaction I get are from female dogs, as in four legs and go "woof woof" (thou some human women do that too at times lol). I often hear is "she usually barks at strangers".

I hear that a lot too! It's androsterone that seems to do it more than anything else.

I've also noticed that -Androsterone makes my cats behave better.

http://scentoferos.com/ego-wall

This is a great presentation James.
I'm very grateful for your posts in the forums as you seem one of the very few who does proper product R&D and I personally have learned a lot, and put together a few dots (so to speak) about many life experiences I've had.