Quote Originally Posted by DrSmellThis
I'd like to

see a comprehensive lit review on the issue...
DST: If you want the .pdf of the article at the URL

below, I will need your current email address.



[url]http://www.haworthpress.com/store/ArticleAbstract.asp?sid=F1AJ71WMKCP48HTMPW51HDT2GP 7Q5DS7&ID=90566[/ur

l]

Quote Originally Posted by DrSmellThis
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.
Isolation of the VNO was

initially linked to a patented process/delivery system as I recall. This was seen by many researchers to be a 2nd

red flag with regard to findings that could not be independently replicated on picogram amounts of "active"

compounds.

In the most recently reported published findings: "Thirty milligrams of AND..., were deposited in

pure form into a 60ml... opaque jar, to be smelled by participants."

From a human VNO activation to effect

approach, it's picogram amounts and unreplicated data. From the more current non-VNO approach we're seeing effects

with (let me check my math... uh?) -- a lot more of the compound.

It's hard for me to imagine any woman

ever being naturally exposed to 20 sniffs of 30 milligrams of AND. So, while it's good to see reports of hormonal,

mood, and arousal change, I'm not sure how all this translates to product development.

Seems we've now gone

from activating the VNO with picogram amounts of AND, blocking the VNO and showing that it makes a difference

(though the data may not be published or replicated) and finally come round to attacking the human

olfactory/pheromonal processing system (sans VNO mention?) with massive doses of chemical.

James V.

Kohl
author of a less recent review at: http://www.nel.edu/22_5/NEL220501R01_Review.htm