Media reactions to pheromones in general

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Just a thread to thoughts about how the media and reporting agencies deal with news relating to pheromones in general.

Seems to be a relunctance to report directly but they do make fleeting references to these things in general or related studies in other related fields like animal or genetic studies.

Also refer to marketing thread for further ideas on how to promote or cover up the pheromones depending on youre views and motives etc.

[**DONOTDELETE**]

I think media sources have trouble because of the lack of hard data. Do they cause a response? Sure, but why is it different for different folks. Is it reproducable? While most of the posters around here would provide personal insight, it is hard to get \"news\" on something like this. There are very nice papers out, don\'t get me wrong, but the different camps out there do not agree, and for a reporter, who do you believe?

[wingrider81]

Walter,DD
I think there is great reluctance to report on anything that hasn\'t been dumbed down for the masses. I find a lot of the technical reference here to be plenty challenging. It\'s a whole lot easier to ape Jerry Springer than to check and cross-check through scientific journals..
Wingrider [img]images/icons/wink.gif[/img]

[**DONOTDELETE**]

DD,

not to get off the subject but I\'m wondering if you have experience with the JB#1 mix. This is my second day using it, and I\'m getting zero reaction to it. I even OD\'d massively and still no reaction. Any insight into this?

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Good point Wingrider. I go ballistic whenever I hear about good cholesterol, or bad cholesterol. Quite honestly, it is just cholesterol. Why is that so hard to get! ARRRRRRRGH!

Sorry to vent, but HDL and LDL are not cholesterol, and for YEARS I have been seeing it printed in the news as such.

But, your initial thought was pretty much correct.

[jvkohl]

Here\'s what Martha McClintock said about the media reports on her recent publication.
------------
The press has given it lots of inaccurate sexual hype -- \"women choose mates like dear old dad\" , \"eau de Dad\", etc. I want
to give a heads up that this is a prematurely narrow slant on our work.

There was NOTHING sexual in the experimental context in which the women made these choices. Indeed, most of the
women did not detect the odors as human at all (indicating a subconscious element to all of this). Thus, while it is certainly
possible that this ability could be part of mate selection and outbreeding avoidance (as is suggested by Carole Ober\'s work on
non-random marriage patterns), it is also possible that this ability could function in a broader social context, i.e. kin recognition or choice of social networks.

But all we did show directly, was that women can smell the difference in a single gene in another person, and do so based on a
match with their own genes--all without conscious awareness that they are judging human odors.
------------------------

Typically, around Valentine\'s Day, I do several interviews, and usually anything I say is blown up into something unrecognizable. But, that\'s the media for you; can\'t live with them: can\'t kill them, either.

[**DONOTDELETE**]

As far as Valentine\'s day is concerned, there are those of us who really do not think much of the day. And for that crowd, there is This site to comfort us. I know it it is mindless promotion, but, it is comfort for a few. He he he [img]images/icons/smile.gif[/img]

[ February 02, 2002: Message edited by: Walter Mitty ]

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Actually Im glad the media doesnt play anything about the pheros and when or if they do they say it doesnt work.

I would rather not live in the day that everyone and their dog used pheromones and our edge is killed.

And IM BACK!