Quote Originally Posted by jvkohl
The same

authors presented (note: past tense) preliminary (note: waiting for final results), unpublished data at a conference

prior to finalizing their study, and after finalizing it published it with no mention of the human VNO. What I "get"

(from this) is that their preliminary data did not support the human VNO approach. On the off chance that it did, we

will see a report from the same group that mentions the human VNO.
James V. Kohl
author/creator: The Scent of

Eros
My understanding was rather that the series of studies is not close to being finalized; but that

preliminary data suggested the active role of the human VNO, with a big caveat.

You may have been thinking

about the intial preliminary study being "finalized".

But that was, apparently, always intended as one of a

series, designed to address precisely the methodological problem of isolating the VNO from standard olfaction. That

takes a while to do correctly, even though they appear to have addressed a part of it already. It was the

first issue that occured to me, and no doubt the researchers as well. They're taking care of business, I suspect.



In the mean time we have some highly intriguing initial results; that are none the less critically vulnerable to

the criticism that their "VNOblock" may have interfered with standard olfaction -- for now. Oh well, sucks to be a

scientist. One has to be patient.

I don't believe we should interpret this normal delay as indicative of those

researchers' enthusiasm for the VNO one way or the other. They are moving forward with their expensive program,

apparently. So they must remain somewhat enthused about the possibility of a role for the VNO.