(10-25-2009 7:10 PM)renny Wrote:  Just read this again...does this remind anyone of TAK?

(10-25-2009 11:02 PM)Diane999 Wrote:  Sounds like TAF to me. Anyone ever go back and read all the early journals on the putatives and test pheromones? Several people were talking about having a "reset" kind of moment and slice of memory loss with TAF. I think it was just a too high concentration.

The other thing that is interesting is everyone early on talked about TAF's ability to reset the playing field and give you another brand new chance. Does that sound like TH-Doc?

Diane

I'd say it's more like TAF than TAK. TAK didn't 'reset' per se like TAF did. TAK was more of a dampening effect. I'd say it took high energy levels (stress, excitement) and toned them down, kinda smoothing it out and saying 'easy there fido, you'll get your food soon'

With TAF there have been moments where I just kinda blanked out, or I spent time looking around like I smoked a bowl and I was in observe mode.

(10-21-2009 11:34 AM)renny Wrote:  Fantastic Ideas! I'd love the opportunity to contribute to the fund or help with shipping. I also like the double blind aspect of having one person obtain and code the molecules, send them to another who puts test numbers on them and sends them to testers. That way no one knows who has what until the two lists are put together at the end of the test.
...

I wouldn't mind contributing to the fund and receiving knowns for testing.

I am a bit more reluctant to participate in double blind testing. One of the issues is that I can steer relationships now fairly successfully, but throwing an unknown into the mix could screw up a business deal or important relationship. That would severely limit my testing opportunities to times I didn't much care what happened. If I have a theoretical basis for thinking it ok I'll procede cautiously. For instance, there have been times wearing "socials" screwed me over in business settings, and I don't want to wear them not knowing what they are. Similarly, there is a ratio that is characteristic of gay males, and while it might be fun to knowingly play with that ratio, I don't want to alter it unaware and then deal with the social or business consequences. Similarly, I like to be able to identify the metabolites of male and female hormones. The effect of a sex-linked hormone can be predicted to be different on the sex that naturally produces it and the one that does not.

I've tested these things, like the time I wore a heavy dose of cops into a business meeting. But I did it knowing exactly what I was doing, and prepared for several possible reactions.

(10-26-2009 9:56 PM)Gone with the Wind Wrote:  I wouldn't mind contributing to the fund and receiving knowns for testing.

I am a bit more reluctant to participate in double blind testing. One of the issues is that I can steer relationships now fairly successfully, but throwing an unknown into the mix could screw up a business deal or important relationship. That would severely limit my testing opportunities to times I didn't much care what happened. If I have a theoretical basis for thinking it ok I'll procede cautiously. For instance, there have been times wearing "socials" screwed me over in business settings, and I don't want to wear them not knowing what they are. Similarly, there is a ratio that is characteristic of gay males, and while it might be fun to knowingly play with that ratio, I don't want to alter it unaware and then deal with the social or business consequences. Similarly, I like to be able to identify the metabolites of male and female hormones. The effect of a sex-linked hormone can be predicted to be different on the sex that naturally produces it and the one that does not.

I've tested these things, like the time I wore a heavy dose of cops into a business meeting. But I did it knowing exactly what I was doing, and prepared for several possible reactions.

I totally understand. This would entail quite a chunk of dedicated time to test the unknowns.

As far as I know there are no current plans to provide "known" pheromones for testing. I don't know if that will change or not.

Diane

I'd be totally down for participating - The thrill of testing a new molecule and pinning down its effects is really what keeps me interested in pheromones as a whole.

It's really seemed like the community of people with that focus at AD has disappeared.

Are there any theories on what P86 is? I just bought another bottle of it from AD, but if it can be had elsewhere, I'd go there. This is one of my "can't live without" pheromones.

(11-12-2009 9:24 PM)ariadne Wrote:  Are there any theories on what P86 is? I just bought another bottle of it from AD, but if it can be had elsewhere, I'd go there. This is one of my "can't live without" pheromones.

P86 is a tough one.

Its been reported more on the social sensual side but I do know that androtics uses it in more of there mens mixes which indicates to me its a androgen. It is also used in the old Alpha womens test pack. MX292 has it I believe which is much liked by the men and has both social and masculine charateristics.

Oh course on a women its acts differently then on a male. This one is gonna be really hard to guess on.

Tisha

One way to test if it is an androgen is if it has a strong sweaty or urinous smell... that is if you can smell androgens.

I think I know what it is, but I'm not going to guess right now and possibly steer you in the wrong direction. But it is probably one of the ones we are going to be testing.

Diane

Quote:One way to test if it is an androgen is if it has a strong sweaty or urinous smell... that is if you can smell androgens.

Hmmm I dont get the piss smell with any pheromone myself so that method doesn't work for me. Even Androstanone smells yummy to me like musky earthy male. Everyone seems to process the smell of pheromones a little different which makes it tough.

(11-21-2009 1:47 PM)Diane999 Wrote:  One way to test if it is an androgen is if it has a strong sweaty or urinous smell... that is if you can smell androgens.

I think I know what it is, but I'm not going to guess right now and possibly steer you in the wrong direction. But it is probably one of the ones we are going to be testing.

I have a bottle of P86 unfragranced, and I do not detect a urinous smell.

I would definitely be interested in helping out with this one, Diane. It's one of my favorite molecules, alongside EST and TAH (have we figured this one out, either?)

(11-22-2009 12:31 PM)ariadne Wrote:  I have a bottle of P86 unfragranced, and I do not detect a urinous smell.

I would definitely be interested in helping out with this one, Diane. It's one of my favorite molecules, alongside EST and TAH (have we figured this one out, either?)

No, but I need to clarify here a bit.

In the test project we are planning on working up a data base of pheromones and their effects. We aren't trying to figure out any of AD's putatives.

When we are done we will know what molecule A does at X, Y, Z concentration, etc. We will not have a glossary of AD products and our guesses of what those are.

And here is why... there is no way to inexpensively test what AD's putatives are or to even test their concentrations. If we had a sophisticated lab we could do it, but we don't the resources, the equipment or the need, really.

We don't need to do guess about AD's putatives, when we can build up a pure, clean data base with the molecules openly named.

It means that control gets put in your hands for real, doesn't it? Because now you can control exactly what molecules you wear and how much. There's no mystery to it, just fun in experimenting.

The only difficult part is choosing which molecules to test first and the concentrations to test, but we are getting there.

Diane