Hi James! It's terrific to have you here. You were on the short list of people that we wanted to invite to the forum.

We've only just gone live with the forum this week, after a discussion last Friday when we came up with the idea to create a new and completely uncensored forum where people could talk about any and everything, so there will probably be some changes and improvements, and any suggestions you may have are welcome and encouraged.

I know you've managed to avoid much of the drama that seems to plague the pheromone industry, and it's our full intent not to become involved in any of it either. I think you'll find that as we grow you can peruse anywhere in the forums and not see any jibber-jabber, misinformation, or name throwing.

I know that reps are not important to you, but as we have for everyone else, your reps from pherotalk are good here too and have been carried over. Your reputation far excceeds the number of points you had though, so I've tacked on a few additional.

Again, welcome to the forum! I look forward to reading your contributions!

Mark

Hi James, I wanted to add my welcome and thank you once again for your generous help sometime back. You may recall a young couple who were trying to use pheromones to help time ovulation in order to address some fertility problems. They had asked me (of all people) some questions about it and I suggested that they PM you with the questions. You went above and beyond to direct them to the proper studies. Unfortunately I lost touch with them shortly thereafter and don't know what the outcome was. So thank you for being so generous with your time then, and thank you for being here!

Thank you. I'm not sure it's possible to avoid the drama entirely, but properly timed exits help (i.e., at the start of any drama). I tried to stay with Love-Scent since Bruce markets my products, but ultimately the science versus opinion controversies became too much for his all powerful moderators to handle.

Meanwhile, back in the scientific community.... Last April a colleague said (jokingly) I should write a scathing review of his forthcoming book on pheromones. After some discussion he realized that we were in agreement. Both of us have been concerned with marketing ploys that have given the concept of human pheromones a bad rap with a more educated audience (e.g., more that what is known by the average teen-ager about pheromones). However, my colleague was not aware that I have already detailed the immune system aspects (MHC diversity et al), which he said no one had addressed. It will be interesting to see where his book leads us both, since no one knows it all, and we have some different perspectives on what the current research (e.g., like what I presented last April) is telling us.

(08-14-2009 9:37 AM)mark-in-dallas Wrote:  Hi James! It's terrific to have you here. You were on the short list of people that we wanted to invite to the forum.

We've only just gone live with the forum this week, after a discussion last Friday when we came up with the idea to create a new and completely uncensored forum where people could talk about any and everything, so there will probably be some changes and improvements, and any suggestions you may have are welcome and encouraged.

I know you've managed to avoid much of the drama that seems to plague the pheromone industry, and it's our full intent not to become involved in any of it either. I think you'll find that as we grow you can peruse anywhere in the forums and not see any jibber-jabber, misinformation, or name throwing.

I know that reps are not important to you, but as we have for everyone else, your reps from pherotalk are good here too and have been carried over. Your reputation far excceeds the number of points you had though, so I've tacked on a few additional.

Again, welcome to the forum! I look forward to reading your contributions!

Mark

---

Thanks. I'm glad you referred that couple to me, but also wonder what the end result might have been. Several more studies have shown what happens with social contact and hormone changes that are driven by pheromones in other mammals, and my mammalian model has become more widely known and accepted with journal/book chapter publication in late 2006/early 2007. Nevertheless, all I have is opinions on what should help with no real data from human studies to back it up. The bottom line is that, for me, it is essential to let people know that there's more to the concept of human pheromones than any marketer is going to explore with their "sex sells" approach.

James V. Kohl

(08-14-2009 10:04 AM)renny Wrote:  Hi James, I wanted to add my welcome and thank you once again for your generous help sometime back. You may recall a young couple who were trying to use pheromones to help time ovulation in order to address some fertility problems. They had asked me (of all people) some questions about it and I suggested that they PM you with the questions. You went above and beyond to direct them to the proper studies. Unfortunately I lost touch with them shortly thereafter and don't know what the outcome was. So thank you for being so generous with your time then, and thank you for being here!

(08-14-2009 7:58 AM)jvkohl Wrote:  When sample size is small, study results don't tell us much about the differences between people/groups. From a biological perspective, culture may enter the picture because social cues are associated with changes in hormone levels (and thus associated with changes in behavior: for example, a response to androstenone).

Thank you for the welcome; I'm here to try and correct some problems that marketers have created. If there's a specific article you need, I may be able to provide it.

James V. Kohl

Yes, that's abosolutely true, unfortunately, separating twins at birth and raising them in different cultures is not some thing we can actively create studies for. That being said, I'm sure by small sample size, you mean ~N<20? If I read my textbook properly, I remember it saying we can begin to make accurate estimates with sample sizes as small as 40-100 people. Assuming of course, that the sample is representative of the population. Either way I will give your paper a thorough reading. Good luck on your campaign against misinformation.

I think we have very good animal models for what pheromones do and don't do, and either they do similar things to humans or not. Of course we can control our behavior, so there are times when some of us don't act like animals.

But consider the more obvious flaw in the visual appeal approach. There is no animal model of how visual appeal develops in humans. Few people deny its importance, yet no one knows how visual input becomes important to humans (as contrasted to other animals' olfactory prowess). So here we have a huge sample size (i.e., of humans) who would no doubt tell you that what they see is more important than olfactory/pheromonal input--but not a one of them can tell you why. Not very logical is it?

James V. Kohl

(08-14-2009 1:50 PM)Phya Wrote:  

(08-14-2009 7:58 AM)jvkohl Wrote:  When sample size is small, study results don't tell us much about the differences between people/groups. From a biological perspective, culture may enter the picture because social cues are associated with changes in hormone levels (and thus associated with changes in behavior: for example, a response to androstenone).

Thank you for the welcome; I'm here to try and correct some problems that marketers have created. If there's a specific article you need, I may be able to provide it.

James V. Kohl

Yes, that's abosolutely true, unfortunately, separating twins at birth and raising them in different cultures is not some thing we can actively create studies for. That being said, I'm sure by small sample size, you mean ~N<20? If I read my textbook properly, I remember it saying we can begin to make accurate estimates with sample sizes as small as 40-100 people. Assuming of course, that the sample is representative of the population. Either way I will give your paper a thorough reading. Good luck on your campaign against misinformation.