NPA secret ingredient revealed?

[jvkohl]

All I can say at this point is that I have extensive literature in my possession which proves the VNO to be very

active and influential on human behavior - such literature is far more current than literature you've been citing,

and had been funded by a multi-million dollar research project of international origin ...

Sorry JVK, but

you're wrong

Please read what I wrote, and tell us why I'm wrong. Here's what I

wrote:
______________________________________________

"Research has shown that the human VNO response (if

any) is not related to the physiological response: there's no connection that allows this, or if there is--it has

not been discovered."
__________________________________________________ ____

Your attempt to compare --

"extensive" and "more current" "literature" -- to published/cited research findings is what's wrong. It's

precisely the problem with the entire human VNO approach, which can be summed up as "We have information that you

don't have and we're not going to give it to you, so you can't possibly replicate our findings, but we're right

and you're wrong."

I'm citing peer-reviewed research and reviews of research that are available to

everyone. Are you saying Gordon Shepherd is wrong? For example:

Shepherd GM. Behaviour: smells, brains and

hormones. Nature. 2006 Jan 12;439(7073):149-51. "The traditional distinction that common odours are perceived

through the olfactory pathway and pheromones by the vomeronasal pathway is dead."

Don't worry, I promise to disclose the information which proves you wrong publicly just as soon as the

NDA is no longer applicable.

Winnifred Cutler said she would disclose her ingredients as soon as she

gets her patent--and that was more than a decade ago. In any case, you won't be proving me wrong, you can only

attempt to show that the top olfactory researchers in the world misinterpreted results that you tell us are "real".

Are you saying Linda Buck is wrong? See also:

Liberles SD, Buck LB. A second class of chemosensory receptors

in the olfactory epithelium. Nature. 2006
"Collectively, these findings indicate that chemical signals that are

likely to function as pheromones are processed by the main olfactory system of mammals. Accordingly, a human

vomeronasal organ is not required." Downloaded July 31, 2006 from

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal...ature05066.pdf

Co-author (above) Linda

Buck is a 2004 Nobel Laureate (Physiology and/or Medicine).

You say you have far more current literature.

The citations here are from Jan 2006 and July 2006. That makes it hard for me to believe you have anything more

current -- unless it has not been peer-reviewed. And if your information has not been subjected to peer-review, you

can say anything you want--except that your literature can be used to show that anyone else is wrong. It can't even

be used to show you are right--until it has been subjected to peer-review.



JVK

[jvkohl]

"In humans, the VNO does not exist, at least not in its complexity. Although developed in early fetal life, all

structures except the vomeronasal duct undergo

regression."

http://content.karger.com/ProdukteDB...&filename=.pdf

Previously posted to "Pheromone

Research"

JVK