My Photo
Bookmark and Share

« New Research: Human Insula, Memories, Learning And The Nose | Main | Chimps Use Sticks As Tools To Kill Monkeys »



I have a lot of material on these subjects, Elaine. I scan the biochemistry journals and various psychological journals. Every 20 years some paradigm gives way to another, a phenomenon that does not inspire confidence. I will try to share some of my seeings with you when I get the time. Genetic theories are now the rage, but that may not, at the present level, last over time. The DNA makes the proteins, but then the proteins start to control the genes that made them. And the human neurosystems that were created by the proteins will soon in turn be driving them. And something else is emerging as well, something no one suspects. There is so much more.

Gotta run for now.


"The human brain is hardwired to respond to sexual smell cues."

But the search for that elusive male pheromone that drives women ape-wild still goes on. If there is such a thing and it's ever discovered, it will save the male humans of the world a great deal of money (and will make its discoverer rich beyond the dreams of avarice.)

Until then, it's gonna have to be flowers, chocolate, dinners, movies...

Elaine Meinel Supkis

Um, the reason the Neanderthals were eaten (er) disappeared was because of those caves. Any male wanting to have sex had to first find a place where no cave bears, mastadons or sabertoothed tigers were lurking.

So it is today: you have to first set up a house if you want something. But then, there are always 'loose' females about if one can't be bothered with the next generation. But having useless sex is ....unevolutionary.

Only the mothers who had babies, reared them and made them successful, pass on genes.

Rodney Reid

Hi blues,

I don't think the be-all-end-all pheromone will be discovered for humans because we pick mates based on differing MHC-1 (Major Histocompatibility Complex class I) not a simple molecule (heh, I hope not anyway!)

But some people at Berkeley found this out a couple weeks back:

Male Sweat Boosts Women's Hormone Levels

"Just a few whiffs of a chemical found in male sweat is enough to raise levels of the stress hormone cortisol in heterosexual women, according to a new study by University of California, Berkeley, scientists.

The study, reported this week in The Journal of Neuroscience, provides the first direct evidence that humans, like rats, moths and butterflies, secrete a scent that affects the physiology of the opposite sex.

"This is the first time anyone has demonstrated that a change in women's hormonal levels is induced by sniffing an identified compound of male sweat," as opposed to applying a chemical to the upper lip, said study leader Claire Wyart, a post-doctoral fellow at UC Berkeley.

The team's work was inspired by previous studies by Wyart's colleague Noam Sobel, associate professor of psychology at UC Berkeley and director of the Berkeley Olfactory Research Program. He found that the chemical androstadienone - a compound found in male sweat and an additive in perfumes and colognes - changed mood, sexual arousal, physiological arousal and brain activation in women.

Yet, contrary to perfume company advertisements, there is no hard evidence that humans respond to the smell of androstadienone or any other chemical in a subliminal or instinctual way similar to the way many mammals and even insects respond to pheromones, Wyart said. Though some humans exhibit a small patch inside their nose resembling the vomeronasal organ in rats that detects pheromones, it appears to be vestigial, with no nerve connection to the brain."



Hi Rodney Reid,

Elaine is the one who's on the big pheromone quest here, rather than I. She takes on everything from the Great Attractor to biochemistry to economic military studies here, which is wonderful. And the pheromone questions are far from settled.

More interesting to me is the manner of how people sort these issues out. We gather evidence, and then arrive at (often hasty) conclusions and consensuses. In my own life, I have made the fabulous discovery that the mere trial of a random new method often leads to some great new tool, which would have been missed had I merely continued in old footsteps. But few people ever make such an effort. I have often noted that dogs have the ability to alter their routines at random, while almost every human remains in hisorher same old ruts from age 20 till age 100. This is a very good reason to become a shamen to become a wolf. Sorcerers endeavor to make use of such creatures, but shamens become them, thus acquiring their ability to shift into novel innovations.

Getting back to the sexual issues, there seem to be four kinds of social approaches. There is the habit of sexual anarchy, which tends to be held in low esteem generally. Perhaps somewhat better, there is the application of sexual royalism, wherein people tend to respond to respond to various one-up-personships, a rather snooty style. There is a family unit method, which often leads to chaotic familial relationships. And there is the tribal approach, wherein the whole tribe is moreorless the family; it is probably the most healthy approach.

Many of the sexual strategies have motivate some of the greatest achievements in other areas. This is often the case where the sexual approach encourages the doing of great deeds. But this collides with the sad human tendency to follow old ruts, wearing them in deeper and deeper to the point where a society succumbs to more innovative usurpers. The best society would have shamens and explorers, but I doubt that such a culture has ever stood the test of time. The shamens degenerate into brutal ministers, and the explorers become mere curators of stale old maps.

Too bad this whole crucial issue has been usurped by academic pedagogues who have divvied it all up into 'sociology', anthropology, economics, public relations, political science, what-have-you.

We need yet another fresh start. And I'm working on that. (But maybe I should publish my already completed linguistics and maths projects first, huh?)


"But maybe I should publish my already completed linguistics and maths projects first, huh?"

That would seem to be the major problem with your "savant-y" types: getting 'em to focus on one thing long enough to type up some results.


I have them all typed up right here (well mostly). (Deeply encrypted.) The thing is, I know exactly what you "unsavant-y" types are likely to do with them.

Elaine Meinel Supkis

Auntie Samanty here!

Thanks for all the comments and links. I read them because I learn from them. No one knows everything and few people know anything. I wasn't nearly so 'smart' before the internet: search engines save lots of time...I don't have to go on the subway to the main library in Manhattan on the East Side to give a slip to some librarians to dig out books for me.

I hope all books end up online. I would dearly love that.


The comments to this entry are closed.