Thank you for clearing up your point for us JV. I know you have made this statement before and I always wondering, why?

(09-20-2012 12:34 PM)zerosix85 Wrote:  Thank you for clearing up your point for us JV. I know you have made this statement before and I always wondering, why?

You're welcome. All of the hoopla about androstadienone started with research on the human VNO which has been debunked. (There is no functional human VNO).

Androstenol alters levels of the hormone most closely linked to the effect of pheromones on hormones and the affect of hormones on behavior in other mammals. Androsterone is more primate specific and individual human specific in that its production varies with reproductive fitness (as indicated by drug testing in athletes).

The difference between a product claim that androstadienone is causing increased attraction, and a claim that a mixture of androstenol / androsterone is causing increased attraction is the amount of scientific support for the claim. For androstadienone there is no scientific support.

Thanks for asking,

(09-20-2012 12:31 PM)jvkohl Wrote:  Thanks. Unfortunately, there is no scientific support for the effect of androstadienone on LH (or any other hormone), which is required to link it to the affect of androstenol/androsterone mixture on behavior. I'm not arguing against what you have experienced, but I am arguing for controlled studies of pheromone-enhancement that incorporate the basic principles of biology and levels of biological organization required to link sensory cause to hormones and their affect on behavior.

I understand.

Androstadienone has been linked to affect women by raising the hormone cortisol. UC Berkeley researchers found that cortisol levels rose within about 15 minutes of sniffing androstadienone, and remained elevated for more than an hour.

The women in the Berkeley study who sniffed androstadienone reported an improved mood and significantly higher sexual arousal, while their physiological response, including blood pressure, heart rate and breathing, also increased.
So this says to me that exposure to Androstadienone raises corticotropin-releasing hormone which in turn raises corticotropin. High corticotropin levels are seen in response to biological stress and causes a rise in corticosteroids in the body. The main corticosteroid of interest I am looking at is cortisol. We know that cortisol is secreted by the body in times of stress, priming the body for a type of response. Im in the field and am not in the lab anymore so I have no access to concrete data to support this, just the thoughts in my head.

Another thing I read awhile back not in that study looked at women’s heart rate and cortisol levels as a measure of stress response, and found that women exhibited less of a stress response after positive physical contact with a partner. Emotional support alone didn’t have the same effect.

There have been numerous studies that show sex has been a great reliever of stress and cortisol reduction. So it made sense that Androstadienone equals more cortisol, equals more feelings of perceived stress, equals more sex (yay), equals less stress. Wash rinse repeat.

On the psychological tip I've been thinking about:
Change in cortisol levels have been linked to psychological stress.
I've recently read a few studies that have shown over time, memories for neutral stimuli decrease but memories for arousing stimuli remain the same or improve.
"Arousal-mediated memory consolidation: Role of the medial temporal lobe in humans"LaBar, K. S.; Phelps, E. A. (1998)

My thoughts about the psychology of Androstadienone has been centered around the concept that emotional arousal appears to increase the likelihood of memory consolidation/formation during the retention stage of memory. This goes back to the above mentioned idea of the physiological response of Androstadienone . Perhaps these are connected. The influence of the Androstadienone molecule tends to manipulate the process in creating a permanent record of this information in the brain. Imprinting.

I'm still reading and testing (testing is the most enjoyable part lol) what exact area(s) of the brain Androstadienone is reacting with. But so far my preliminary finding has been that Androstadienone can increase cortisol and by a bit of conditioning I can lead the response of enjoyable sex as a stress/cortisol release.

For contrast to androstadienone-associated effects on stress hormones, you might want to look downstream from the effect of androstenol on LH to see what can only be viewed as a positive influence on estradiol and mood, which would explain the affect of the androstenol/androsterone mix on behavior as is consistent with model organisms, where species-specific affects on behavior are of primary concern. I'm not sure there is any species-specificity with androstadienone, which indicates to me it is not likely to have an direct effect on hormone levels of women or affects on their behavior. The stress associated response has been attributed to the amount used in the studies, which is a supraphysiological dose that has left olfactory researchers complaining about an assault on the senses that is, of course, stressful.

(09-20-2012 4:15 PM)jvkohl Wrote:  I'm not sure there is any species-specificity with androstadienone, which indicates to me it is not likely to have an direct effect on hormone levels of women or affects on their behavior.

I understand that it has not been "scientifically proven" in a lab, and that it may not be a pheromone or species specific.
But over hundreds of interactions (I am always sober), it seems to have a positive or mitigating effect on women.
Looking at drawings representing faces is not "scientific" for studying effects of human interactions imo.
Mood, maybe.
The experiment/study should be about people interacting and with a statistically significant amount of people involved. And keeping the variables at a minimum.
It would not take much to do an experiment in a busy city with real people over hundreds of instances of contact with strangers.
But then again these scientific people dont seem all that keen on interacting with other humans.

And to be fastidious Androstadienone is stinky stuff, so even at worse (or minimum) it will affect a womens behavior as she says "OMGZ you stink!" lol
But alas I have never had this, the stink seems to bother me more than them.

Something of interest - the preparation of the androstadienone for delivery :

Quote:8.3.1.2 Compounds
The androstadienone solution consisted of a 250 μM concentration of androstadienone (Steraloid Inc.,
London; purity > 98%) in propylene glycol (Sigma Aldrich; purity > 99%) with an odor mask consisting of 1 %
eugenol (Sigma Aldrich, purity > 99%). The control substance consisted of propylene glycol with 1% eugenol.
Same concentrations were used in our previous experiments and in earlier studies (Jacob & McClintock, 2000;
Lundström et al., 2003; Olsson et al., 2006). Both solutions were applied to the subject’s nose via a constant air
flow (2 l/m) using a custom built olfactometer (Boesveldt et al., 2010; Lundström, Gordon, Albrecht, Alden, &
Boesveldt, 2010).

How much dienone in how much PG?

Please correct my math, it's been about 20+ years since I was in the lab...

With a molecular weight of 270.40914 [g/mol], 1 mole of dienone is 270.40914 grams in 1 liter of solution.

1 molar = 270 grams in 1 liter, so 1 micromolar = 270 micrograms in 1 liter.

We have 250 micromolar, so 250 micromolar * 270 micrograms / 1 liter = 67500 mcg in 1 liter.

If 10 ml of the stock solution were used, there would be 67500 mcg/liter * .001 liter/ml= 67.5 mcg/ml for a total of 675 mcg present in 10 ml of solution.

If there was a 1:10 ratio of the PG (ech, they should have used DPG and EtOH..) with 10 ml of the dienone and 90 ml of the PG, then they would get 6.75 mcg per ml final product.

Even a 1 ml dose of 6.75 mcg of androstadienone+dpg is probably too low to elicit the types of responses that folks here in the forum use, and PG as the carrier is very suspect in my mind for having sufficient vapor pressure/boiling point to carry off the dienone properly.

So I would question whether this would be more effectively done as a study using a common by volume 90% EtOH+pheromone : 10% DPG diluent:carrier mix.

I bet Monika didn't have enough mones in her sauce to deliver any relevant reactions - most folks dose around 20-60 mcg of androstadienone to get reactions, and the 40-50 mcg range seems to be pretty commonly reported to get noticeable IOIs. Of course most mones are delivered airborne from the skin and at a range of up to 4-5 feet, so 6-7 mcg directly up the nose may be more significant. I didn't see Pherotruth mentioned in the references, so where did she get her formulation for dispersal of the pheromone?

Besides, the androstadienone would typically be in proportion to other pheromones either from a synthetic blend or in combination with natural pheromones wafting off the pheromoner (new word?), and from what I've read the *proportion* of dienone relative to other pheromones is crucial to the success of the signature.

So an isolated pheromone with no other pheromonal components delivered straight up the schnozz may simply cause the presence of the dienone to make no impact, since other key elements to a signature may be missing.





, at a molar content of 250 micromoles would be 270 mcg * 250 moles in 1 mcl =
250 micromolar solution would be


, each liter would contain 0.925 micrograms of dienone.


one gram of the stock solution would contain 250 micrograms.
Diluted in

As3 noted this below in this thread http://pherotruth.org/Thread-Androstadie...53?page=13:

Quote:as33156 Wrote:
I wouldn't say that anything over 60mcg is useless it's just overkill. When I wear 80mcg and higher of Androstadienone I tend to notice a lot of women start to shiver. You know like when it cold and you get a tingle that runs through your spin and makes you do a shake? Or like when you give a girl a good compound orgasm and they just start shaking for a few seconds.

Wish I could explain it better.