(05-23-2010 2:25 AM)mark-in-dallas Wrote:  And how is that ANY different from asking somebody to prove a positive?

Proving a positive usually includes tangible results, where as proving a negative is done by the lack of tangible results. Proving a positive generally yields irrefutable proof (or at least pretty watertight proof), whereas a the proof of a negative is subject to change as soon as a positive result happens.

Take the androstenone argument for example. No study has shown with measurable data that it is a sexual attractant, yet we all believe, based on our experiences, that it really is. Based on this, can you absolutely guarantee that everyone else will experience the exact same thing as you with androstenone? Of course you can't, because at best, the effectiveness of it is theoretical, since available data would show otherwise.

The problem with anecdotal evidence is that it's tied to the ego rather than statistics. It's personal, so when someone tells you that androstenone is not a sexual attractant based on scientific studies, your first instinct is to call bullshit because you've experienced the effects yourself. What this doesn't take into account is psychosomatic response or placebo effects, because lacking any scientific data proving otherwise, that's really the only empirical way to explain androstenone's effectiveness.

Of course, a new study could be done that blows the doors off of everything we know, and that's always a possibility. Until then, androstenone only "officially" works in theory. Does that mean I'll stop using it? Of course not. I'm just going to keep in mind that what I'm experiencing with it *COULD* be due to other factors, perhaps even many that contribute to a sum greater than the parts.

Quote:An opinion is just that, one persons perception!

And opinions are like......well, I think you know the answer to that.

(05-22-2010 9:53 PM)Data4 Wrote:  Telling someone to prove a negative to disprove opinion is a cop out, and I say this with all due respect, Tisha. It's a common tactic, particularly in the political arena, when there is no substance to an argument. For example, two people argue a point and neither one budges. Finally one of them throws out the atomic bomb: "Well, you're a racist! Prove me wrong!", and it's all over.

I get really uncomfortable with that sort of reasoning, because it's fruitless.

You missed the meaning of my statement Data. I meant it in a ironic sense. That's OK its hard to express my point in the written word but I will try....................

Proving something is and proving something is not leads to the same thing Data. The conclusion is the same its just reached with a different method or from a different perspective. My point is its all perspective. I do not expect James or Diane to go out and actually prove anything. My statement was not speaking to them personally. I am speaking about science as a whole. You can not prove something is without proving its not and vice versa. That's why I find it so ironic when marketers start posting studies to back up there opinions to try to make it look like facts. The verdict is still out on Androstenone. Its still just a opinion or theory gained from our experience. You can find studies that go either way. You can find experiences that go either way. Who is right and who is wrong ? At this time neither side because its all a opinion derived from our own experiences. So if you use Androstenone and you like it keep using it. If you dont like it dont use it. Its really that simple.

On a side note. I can come up with tons of info on why Alpha Androstenol or any other molecule can be dangerous or cause negative effects. To much water can kill a person should we not use water ? If we look at only the negative in molecules which we will find because one can not exist without the other then we fail to see the positives. If we look for only positives then we fail to see the negatives. Its all about balance.

I will say..............

I do not agree with Di's perspective on Androstenone nor do I agree on Jasmins perspective on Androstadienone . My not agreeing doesn't make either of us wrong or right.

Rob Wrote:I can't speak for Diane. I really don't know what her comfort level is on this stuff. I just related some things that I've heard from her in the past and I've already speculated way beyond my comfort level.

I did not choose the word comfortable as a insult or to speak for her. I respect that she doesn't just use them because everyone else is and she is following her own path derived from her own opinions and beliefs. I dont think her view on Androstenone speaks for the whole pheromone community or the scientific community and I dont think she intended it that way. It speaks of her vision for her store which is fine.



Tisha

(05-23-2010 4:22 AM)Data4 Wrote:  Proving a positive usually includes tangible results, where as proving a negative is done by the lack of tangible results. Proving a positive generally yields irrefutable proof (or at least pretty watertight proof), whereas a the proof of a negative is subject to change as soon as a positive result happens..

Jon, I'm not trying to be argumentative here, I'm really not. But, the same holds true in reverse: You can prove a positive by producing tangible irrefutable results, but as soon as those results are proven to untrue, inaccurate, a factor of something else or some other condition, those results are no longer true.

Here's one of the best explanations I've seen:

Quote:Facts are the worlds data. Theories are developed thoughts that attempt to explain our worlds facts. Facts don't disappear when researchers argue rival theories to explain them.

Here's an example of one of those theories, When we went to school it was considered factual that there were 109 elements in the periodic table. Since 1994, six new elements have been discovered.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/emptybelly/212349816/

There is no such thing as a blue flamingo...here's a picture of one.

There are millions of flamingos all around the world. It's not possible to prove that there is no blue flamingo by observation. There are too many and they move around too much. They are born and they die in enormous flocks in far away and inhospitable places. So how do we know that this photo is a wonderful fake? Flamingos eat a highly specialized diet of various briny crustaceans. They are so highly adapted to a specific method of feeding that it's nearly impossible to feed them anything else. It's the pink/orange color of the crustacean shells that give them their color. All crustacean shells are made of the same thing. It's defining of a crustacean that they have a shell made of this substance. So no blue flamingos. Proof of a negative.

Elements added to the periodic table were discovered because they were predicted by existing data. No data I've seen predicts that androstenone might be a human pheromone.

Theoretically, by definition, mixtures of human pheromones alter levels of luteinizing hormone and also act specifically on human behavior. Comparing this mammalian model of developmental effects on hormones and behavior to the developing periodic table of elements might make it easier to understand why the mammalian model (i.e., theory) does not predict that androstenone is an attractive human pheromone, and also predicts the level of evidence that might be required for scientists to further study androstenone -- except for its use in pigs.

If someone outside science had ever accurately predicted the discovery of a human pheromone (of a blue flamingo) or of a new element--based on their experience, for example--it would be much easier to dismiss current theories, data, and the scientific method. Starting with an aversive odor that experience tells you is an attractant might get you good results, but it's not a scientific approach to getting good results. You might just as well begin hunting for blue flamingos.

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

(05-23-2010 11:13 AM)mark-in-dallas Wrote:  Jon, I'm not trying to be argumentative here, I'm really not. But, the same holds true in reverse: You can prove a positive by producing tangible irrefutable results, but as soon as those results are proven to untrue, inaccurate, a factor of something else or some other condition, those results are no longer true.

Here's one of the best explanations I've seen:

Quote:Facts are the worlds data. Theories are developed thoughts that attempt to explain our worlds facts. Facts don't disappear when researchers argue rival theories to explain them.

Here's an example of one of those theories, When we went to school it was considered factual that there were 109 elements in the periodic table. Since 1994, six new elements have been discovered.

Really this is ridiculous. We are debating peoples opinions and no one can win this debate. James is correct there is no scientific proof of human pheromones, we all know there is still a long way to go. The people who have used the products containing Androstenone are correct as well and have the right to there opinion made from using the product. It has a effect.........whether its a pheromonal effect or not is the question. Is the effect the same for everyone. No of course not we all know pheromones or what we call pheromones are not one size fits all.

I think this whole thing is more about people assuming we are slamming Diane in some way or saying she is self serving which are both comments Data made. Go back and read, no one is slamming her. I dont see how having a different opinion then hers is slamming her. Thats ego driven not giving your opinion.

No one is dismissing the scientific studies. We are not scientists here we are pheromone users sharing our experiences. We are not selling anything here or trying to convience anyone we are right and others are wrong. Someone asked a opinion on what was posted on Dianes site although I cant seem to find it on her site. We may not have agreed with some of what was written but we certainly all agreed she has the right to sell what she see's fit and that her products do not suffer for not having Androstenone in them. Since when does everyone opinion have to be the same.

Just to prove my point read this >>>>>

http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cach...wxAEhMn3FA

Click on view in HTML if you cant see it or try this one ....... http://www.dana.org/WorkArea/downloadass...x?id=19402

NO PHEROMONE HAS BEEN TRUELY PROVEN. Therefore everything we buy at androtics, Love Scent Love Potion Paradise 7 and even from James with Scent of Eros is ancedotal. There is no proof it does anything we can only share our experiences and the opinion we draw from those experiences.

Tisha

jvkohl Wrote:Elements added to the periodic table were discovered because they were predicted by existing data. No data I've seen predicts that androstenone might be a human pheromone.

Not trying to be argumentative, but I believe that there are a number of reasons to believe that Androstenone is a human pheromone, and while it's debatable as to how much of a purpose it serves today, it must serve A purpose.

We know that Androstenone acts as a pheromone in pigs, that's a given.

Evolution has been proven. The missing link has been found and we can now trace our ancestory back to at least primates. Not to say that evolution resulted from random chaos and that there isn't an element of creation and intelligent design in that evolution, but we did evolve.

We know that the human body is highly efficient, having evolved over many millenia, and in a healthy human there is little or no wasteful production. Excepting the digestive system, which actually gleans all useful material from food intake, than discards the waste.

We know that the appendix once served a greater purpose than today, and although it still may serve a purpose in the immune system, it is largely a vestigial organ now.

We know that the tonsils function is to filter out germs, but that they are now considered to be more of a liabilty in adults than beneficial, which may be because the types of germs and infections that the tonsils serve to filter out are relatively uncommon in today's society.

We know that Androstadienone breaks down into to androstenol, and that androstenol then changes to androstenone. We know that Androstadienone has pheromonal properties in syncing womens menstrual cycles when in close quarters.

And, anecdotal evidence suggests that Androstadienone also serves to comfort women during their menstual cycles. Anecdotal evidence also suggests that Androstenol has social pheromonal properties.

If Androstenone didn't serve a purpose, evolution suggests that Androstenol would either breakdown into something more useful, or not continue to breakdown.

The breakdown chain itself makes sense. First to comfort, then engage, and finally to cause arousal.

We know hat humans have a VNO, but that it is vestigial now. Yet Androstenone has survived. If not as a pheromone, then to what purpose.

In July or August, I'm planning to formally announce findings from a student researcher, working with my basic study design, under the professorship of a friend. The reported behavioral affect is a first, since others are reporting only changes in mood and/or physiology. Our findings need to be replicated, but they will definitely advance the concept beyond mere predictions and anecdotes.

I mentioned earlier that another group used androstadienone and a very similar study design, but found no effect on behavior. Contrasting findings may help both scientists and end-users of product to better determine what to look for and what to expect, without reading all the scientific papers or opinions.

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

(05-23-2010 1:10 PM)Tisha Wrote:  NO PHEROMONE HAS BEEN TRUELY PROVEN. Therefore everything we buy at androtics, Love Scent Love Potion Paradise 7 and even from James with Scent of Eros is ancedotal. There is no proof it does anything we can only share our experiences and the opinion we draw from those experiences.

(05-20-2010 5:36 PM)andrew88777 Wrote:  The available research data strongly suggests that this steroid molecule affects the trigeminal nerve pathways (1) and can be a trigeminal nerve irritant. (The trigeminal nerve evolved as part of the body's warning system, sensing potentially noxious stimuli.)

Hmm, I never knew that about the trigeminal nerve (Cranial Nerve V, CN5). From what I'm learning currently, it is a sensory nerve, but I was given the impression that it was not that kind of sensory nerve. It's mostly cutaneous and for pain/temp/pressure + proprioception.

JVK, I was wondering if you could enlighten me if there has been research that suggests that CN5 can sense more than just that because that'd be really interesting.

I did not realize that this would cause such a debate here! I thought it was interesting and useful for everyone to know, when making purchases from her. Its different using an attraction mix, and not feeling the None vibe to it. Like I had mentioned before I use None mostly when I use Instant Jerk. I think that for me, it stimulates my fight response, because of the way I respond. Even though my wife can smell none, if I wear it, I still have worn it around her. Especially when trying out MXs. I believe it triggers a flight response in her, for whatever reasons. There has not been any arousal from her. When I used Turn up the heat, she choked and gagged lol. It did the opposite that night!

Here is the link to Diane's posting on her website. Its down the page some if you want to see it for yourself.
http://www.paradise7.org/Home_Page.html