I have to admit I haven't
reviewed the research on this in a while. Human pheromone research moves too slowly for my taste. Someday I'll do
another review and catch up. JVK is the one who seems to keep track of every study that comes out.
But my
recollection from a couple years ago is simply that research to date has been inconclusive, except for the "Erox
commissioned/related" studies, several of which reportedly suggest evidence of a "vague" effect (without
articulating a pathway or process).
Specifically, there has been no evidence to suggest a neural pathway for
the VNO (a more recent study or two has addressed this); and evidence of its activity has been contradictory.
The prevailing wisdom was simply that it is not theoretically necessary to posit the VNO to exist, in order to
explain a detailed pheromone effect. You can get there with standard olfaction. So some researchers felt it was a
waste of time to focus on the VNO.
That was different from saying categorically that there is no active VNO.
Last I checked I was not convinced the VNO has no role in olfaction. Maybe the intellectual scenario has changed
recently, and I'd change my mind.
But I've remained curious, partly because the organ would seem to be
evolutionarily adaptive for some scenarios if it did exist; since you'd be bypassing the
complexities/inefficiencies of standard olfaction.
I'd like to see a comprehensive lit review on the issue,
although Erox and gang (Berliner, et al) have felt little obligation to contribute to the scientific community,
thinking they are sitting on the golden goose. Then I could give a more intelligent opinion.
Again, I'd still
like to know how they isolated the VNO from standard olfaction in the most recent study alluded to at the beginning
of the thread. The procedure to do this is not obvious to me. That seems the most obvious area for initial critical
review, methodologically.
Bookmarks