Do pheromones also work with humans?

[xdisciplex]

I'm a bit confused. I saw something on TV where they did tests with women.
They had different women smell on shirts which contained certain male hormones. Some of the women thought that the shirts smell disgusting while other women were totally turned on by this smell. Later on they said that the women which were turned on by the smell just had their fertile phase. This means that when a woman is in this phase smelly men attract her, isn't this sick? They of course also used this as proof for evolution and said that this is a leftover from our hairy ancestors. What do you think about this? This appears so primitive to me and it makes everything look so materialistic as if everything was simply about hormones and molecules and wether a woman likes you doesn't even depend on your personality but on hormones and things which you cannot even influence. I don't understand this. I mean it's understanable that such things exist in the animal kingdom because somehow animals have to procreate but why do the same things also work with humans? Did God design this? If yes, why? Does God want to make sure that humans keep multiplying or what? Is this a result of the fall?
There are so many things which don't make sense to me.
What if things such as love aren't even real and only constructs of ideas?
What if you think you actually love a person because of her character and the truth is you only feel attracted to her because you're wired this way and attracted by her smell and you don't even know why you're attracted to her? Wouldn't this be totally sick? I think this is very depressing. Then where is the difference between us and animals which only act upon their primitive instincts? What if we are the same and don't even know it?

 

[Not_hard_to_find]

There are so many things which don't make sense to me.

That, my dear, is quite obvious. However, you've been given considerable instruction. Reminds me of the saying: "Buy them books; send them to school; they just eat the books!"

Find a doctrinally secure pastor and focus on learning.

 

[Clean1]

Scientists will experiment on anything
We are not the same as animals. Take a look at Genesis 1:26,"And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth."
If we were animals then eating chicken, cows, etc. would make us cannibals

About the hormone issue. Some women may like a man for the way he smells, looks, talks, acts, etc. and some won't. I really doubt it has to do with womens 'femine' time. Some women think that Matt Damon is gorgeous while others may think that he is the ugliest man alive. Is that because of hormones? No. Not everyone is going to be attracked to the same person.

Love isn't based on hormones, looks, etc. or at least it shouldn't be. If you think your in love with someone because he/she is the hottest thing on the planet then your not really in love with that person. Love is when you love a person for know matter who they are, what they do, how they look, how they act, etc. Someone you want to spend the rest of your life with because you love them.
If a women only married a man because of the way he smells how long do you think that relationship would last:smilewinkgrin:?

 

[Scarlett O.]

I'm a bit confused. I saw something on TV where they did tests with women.
They had different women smell on shirts which contained certain male hormones. Some of the women thought that the shirts smell disgusting while other women were totally turned on by this smell. Later on they said that the women which were turned on by the smell just had their fertile phase. This means that when a woman is in this phase smelly men attract her, isn't this sick?

You made an incorrect correlation in your last sentence. If you were to leave out your last sentence here, then the rest of your post would never have been written.

The shirts weren't "smelly". They didn't stink. They just had not been washed and smelled like a man smells after a day of wearing that shirt. Not stinky, just needing a bath.

Some women, quite naturally, do not like the smell of a shirt that needs washing.

Some women, quite naturally, are aroused by these kinds of smells. It isn't sick, it's just how we are designed. Some people like and enjoy the smell of their mates and the smells of the opposite sex.

We are not talking about offensive body odor, just the day-to-day smells coming from oil glands in our bodies.

They of course also used this as proof for evolution and said that this is a leftover from our hairy ancestors. What do you think about this? This appears so primitive to me and it makes everything look so materialistic as if everything was simply about hormones and molecules and wether a woman likes you doesn't even depend on your personality but on hormones and things which you cannot even influence.

No, this isn't proof of evolution. What do I think? I think it's quite normal for many people to like it when their mates smell good.....naturally good. I personally think that all of the colognes and perfumes and aftershaves we use are masking natural odors (again, NOT offensive body odors) that we shouldn't be masking.

Everyone here who has a mate knows what I am talking about. Some natural smells from others can be pleasant, even arousing. Some people when holding their spouse very close enjoy the smell. This doesn't mean we are animals nor evolved from animals. It just means that God provided some people with a very, very sensitive olfactory system and these people are sensitive to smells the same way that others are sensitive to sounds or sights.

This is not primitive and you have made an incorrect and BIG jump from smells being subtlely attractive to one's personality and good efforts to try and please someone being worth absolutely nothing.

I don't understand this.

This, like so many other things you claim not to understand, is not rocket science. You are way over-generalizing things.

I mean it's understanable that such things exist in the animal kingdom because somehow animals have to procreate but why do the same things also work with humans?

We are not animals, we are human. However, we share millions of the same characteristics of animals. We eat, drink, go to the bathroom, bear children, pair-bond, fight, get hurt, die, have families, bleed, act silly, get hot, get cold, find shelter .....etc.

Our bodies work like animal bodies do. Like most animals, we have a central nervous system, reproductive organs, eyes, noses, heads, tails,.....etc.

This doesn't make us animals, but we are like them in many ways.

That shouldn't really bother anyone, especially christians.

Did God design this?

Yes.

If yes, why?

Because He is a creative genius.

Does God want to make sure that humans keep multiplying or what?

Yes, He wants us to procreate and the arousal by "smell" is certainly not the only way He causes "attraction" between men and women. Sight, touch, companionship, whispering to each other, making each other laugh, crying together, holding hands, .......etc. There are untold ways that God made sure that men would like women and that women would like men and that they two would have a desire to pair-bond, marry, stay together, and have families.

Is this a result of the fall?

No. It is not. Adam and Eve's bodies were created differently, including different smells, from the beginning.

There are so many things which don't make sense to me.

That's alright.

What if things such as love aren't even real and only constructs of ideas?

Again....here is where you have taken a simple concept and extrapolated an entire philosphy of life from it that isn't true and doesn't relate to the original concept.

What if you think you actually love a person because of her character and the truth is you only feel attracted to her because you're wired this way and attracted by her smell and you don't even know why you're attracted to her? Wouldn't this be totally sick?

There are people all of the time who confuse love with sexual attraction. It's an age old problem in this old world. But that has nothing to do the reality that physiological components can and do contribute to attraction.

Most people who are mature and understand what love really is can usually tell the difference.

I think this is very depressing.

That's because you've made it depressing. Physical attraction is normal and natural. Whether it be smell or sight or touch. Love is a heart matter that umbrellas over many things, including physical attraction. You have turned it around backwards.

Then where is the difference between us and animals which only act upon their primitive instincts? What if we are the same and don't even know it?

The difference between humans and animals is clear. Humans are created in the image of Holy and Almighty God. Not our bodies, but our spirit.

Our bodies, or our flesh, share similarities with animals.

But we are not the same.......and we can and do know it.

 

[gb93433]

This appears so primitive to me and it makes everything look so materialistic as if everything was simply about hormones and molecules and wether a woman likes you doesn't even depend on your personality but on hormones and things which you cannot even influence.

Then where is the difference between us and animals which only act upon their primitive instincts? What if we are the same and don't even know it?

There are a lot of "if" statements in your posting. My life is not dependent upon "if" statements treated or examined as fact.

The primary difference between humans and animals is the spiritual dimension of life as well as morality and ethics.

You posting does demonstrate to a degree that God does care about the smallest details of our life. So be glad about that.

People attract who they are. If they are not spiritual then spiritual people will not be attracted to them

The one thing that holds a marriage togetehe is what the couple have in common spiritually. So that throws the idea of having no control out of the water.

 

[Hope of Glory]

We are not the same as animals. Take a look at Genesis 1:26,"And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth."
If we were animals then eating chicken, cows, etc. would make us cannibals

Ah, but the Bible does tells us that animals and man both have souls, so why could we not also be affected by pheromones?

 

[donnA]

where does the bible say animals have souls?

 

[Brother Bob]

Be careful of people with long noses.

Sooooooo, that was what they were doing?

 

[pinoybaptist]

Pheromones are for insects, not human beings.

As a pest control technician, I used pheromones for moths, roaches, flies, and like insects when working in houses or in establishments.

The idea is that these synthetic pheromones mimic the scent a female insect secretes, which attract males and make them come out of their hiding places, seek out the source of the smell, and in the process get stuck in the glueboards where we stick the pheromone, or else walk on the sprayed surface and get the chemicals into their systems.

Women do not manufacture and secrete pheromones. Men do not manufacture and secrete pheromones, either. We have hormones, and if we are anywhere near normal and healthy, there is a certain age when our hormones are "raging", so to speak. But because we are not descendants of animals like those "smart" scientists want us to believe, we do not "ride" anytime we feel like it.

A JW I once tangled with in the Philippines insisted that man does not have a soul, only a spirit. His mistake was that he added, "like the animals", and so I jumped on him at that and asked him if he makes out with his wife right in the middle of the street like a dog which has the breath of life in it but not the intellect that a soul gives. He got the drift.

I apologize if the language is too graphic for anyone, and the moderators can do what they need to do if so.

Just remember that there are "smart" scientists who think it is an honor to imagine that he himself was once a mindless blob floating around who developed into a tadpole who developed legs who developed tails and developed intelligence and became an ape before becoming a human being with the intellect to figure out how to reach the moon.

To them it is an insult to even suggest that there is a God who created them in His image.

On the other hand, there are really smart scientists around too, as in intelligent who believe that Someone infinitely smarter than they are created the things we see around us, and created man in His image.

 

[El_Guero]

That, my dear, is quite obvious. However, you've been given considerable instruction. Reminds me of the saying: "Buy them books; send them to school; they just eat the books!"

Find a doctrinally secure pastor and focus on learning.

So very true . . .

 

[Hope of Glory]

where does the bible say animals have souls?

The Hebrew word for “soul is “nephesh” and the Greek word for “soul” is “psuche” and you can find these words applied to animals in Genesis 1:20, 21, 30 and Revelation 8:9 and 16:3. Scripture shows us clearly that animals have souls, but spirit (pneuma) is never applied to animals.

 

[xdisciplex]

Hi!
I just read the whole replies. Thank you all for replying.

But somehow I still don't like this thought because it sounds so much like "survival of the fittest". The males which have the highest testosterone have the "best" smell and this means they get the most women. This is basically what this is getting at. Why is this so? I also saw something on TV where they filmed different men which were dancing and then women had to judge which man is the most attractive one. And they chose the man who had the highest testosterone levels without being aware of it. This experiment is supposed to prove that having high testosterone also influences the way you move and so on and women are always attracted by the most potent males. This is what I think is kind of sick because it makes humans look like animals which operate on totally primitive rules.

Like:

Smell good + look masculine = high testosterone > have sex + produce a baby

This seems so totally primitive to me. I don't know how much science is behind this but you hear this so often that women go buy how masculine a man looks and all this stuff. What if this is true? Or what if they are not even aware of it and simply do this subconsciously because they are wired this way? I mean men also feel attracted to women which have a feminine shape. This is nothing new. Why is this so? This has nothing at all to do with cultural aspects. They tested this and showed different pictures of women to natives which lived far off from our civilization and they also prefered the ones which looked very feminine. Does this mean that God created this mechanism in order to make humans produce the best offspring? To me it doesn't make sense that these principles like "survival of the fittest" and natural selection should also apply to humans.

 

[Clean1]

As I said before, Scientists will experiment on anything. And now it is television: they will make a show out of anything . Anyway... God designed everything, including humans and how we function. Just because some guy has a high whatever you call it doesn't mean he is going to attrack all the girls.
QUOTE: Does this mean that God created this mechanism in order to make humans produce the best offspring?
I don't think so. Some of the most beautiful people have children that are not so beautiful .

What guy hasn't been attracked to a feminine looking woman? Even in the Bible God warns men of this attraction. God made woman to be attractive in mans eyes. Satan can turn that attraction into a sin however and get you into a whole lot of trouble.

Certain woman are attracked to certain men and visa-versa. On first impulse we are automatically attracked to the best looking person. Is that because of some smell or whatever you called it? I don't think so. It isn't until we get to know that person that we find out how truly beautiful they really are. Some of the most best looking men/woman turn out to be the biggest of jerks.

Scientists have and will continue to try and explain things in a way that leaves God out of the picture. They try to explain how men and woman are attracked to each other because of some smell or whatever. God designed each person differently and because of this each person will be attracked to different people.
You no why natural selection or survival of the fittest doesn't make sense? Because it isn't true. There is no such thing as natural selection or survival of the fittest. If there was then the Bible would be false. Nature has absolutely nothing to do with how people are attracked to each other. Survival of the fittest also would make the Bible false if it were true. It is more like survival of the most spiritual: Whoever is more in tune with God and obeys Him will survive the longest (Ephesians 6:3).

 

[xdisciplex]

I did some research. This stuff really seems to work. There are even whole forums on the net only about pheromones. Look at this:

Q: What do the different pheromones do?
A: We know of only a few pheromones, some of which we know are used in products and over the years we come to understand some of their effects from a combination of anecdotal evidence and research papers. Here is a brief outline of the most common ones:

• Androstenone (aka -none, Anone): Signals dominance and aggression, quite competitive. -none is often associated with a sexual response, but by no means exclusively.
• Androstenol (aka -nol, Anol): Signals youth, and sociability, often induces lots of talking, friendliness and comfort. As it often seems to cause conversation, it can be a good ice breaker.
• Androsterone (aka -rone, Arone): Signals masculinity. It also creates an impression of reliability and protection (i.e. "this is the alpha male who can look after me").

or this:

Human pheromones - Copulins

Copulins are an exclusively female group of pheromones. There are secreted into the vagina at the optimum ratios during ovulation with the aim of encouraging men to desire to copulate. This group of pheromones primarily consists of fatty acids that would serve little to no function on there own, but in combination they have been shown to increase testosterone levels in men by 150% (Astrid Jutte study). This increase in testosterone may cause feelings of arousal in men if a woman is present. It is said that once a man smells Copulins on a woman she is deemed to be more attractive.
Typical reactions from Copulins will be consistent with male indications of interest.

I don't understand this. What are these mechanisms good for? They cannot simply be seen as a symptom of the fallen world, can they? They clearly seem to be designed. Intelligent mechanisms to attract men and women. But this doesn't make any sense to me. On the one hand God creates this stuff to attract men and women and on the other hand lusting after a woman is a sin.
Let's say I lust after a woman because of these pheromones which influence me and I don't even know why I'm reacting this way then how can I even be blamed for it? This is really confusing.
These are all totally primitive instincts, this is also why psychologists and anthropologists are so interested in pheromones because it makes modern humans look like primitive cavemen which only react to smells and visual things.

This here is also interesting:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/...ve&db=PubMed&list_uids=16788900&dopt=Citation

Family composition (e.g., the absence of a father) is associated with pubertal timing in women, although the socioendocrinology of the human primate is poorly understood. To better understand social influences on sexual maturation, retrospective data were collected on menarcheal age and family composition from a sample of approximately 1,938 participants from a college population. Absence of a biological father, the presence of half- and step-brothers, and living in an urban environment were associated with earlier menarche. The presence of sisters in the household while growing up, especially older sisters, was associated with delayed menarche. Menarcheal age was not affected by number of brothers in the household, nor was there an effect of birth order. Body weight and race were also associated with menarche. The present findings advance the literature as they are suggestive of putative human pheromones that modulate sexual maturation to promote gene survival and prevent inbreeding, as occurs in rodents and nonhuman primates.

I really ask myself what this stuff is good for. This means that humans are influenced and controlled by things which they don't even know about. I don't like this thought.

 

[El_Guero]

With as much 'research' as you have done, you should have found that discipline that you are looking for.

Who is the discipler?

Ain't :jesus: great?

I did some research. This stuff really seems to work. There are even whole forums on the net only about pheromones. Look at this:


or this:


I don't understand this. What are these mechanisms good for? They cannot simply be seen as a symptom of the fallen world, can they? They clearly seem to be designed. Intelligent mechanisms to attract men and women. But this doesn't make any sense to me. On the one hand God creates this stuff to attract men and women and on the other hand lusting after a woman is a sin.
Let's say I lust after a woman because of these pheromones which influence me and I don't even know why I'm reacting this way then how can I even be blamed for it? This is really confusing.
These are all totally primitive instincts, this is also why psychologists and anthropologists are so interested in pheromones because it makes modern humans look like primitive cavemen which only react to smells and visual things.

This here is also interesting:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/...ve&db=PubMed&list_uids=16788900&dopt=Citation

Family composition (e.g., the absence of a father) is associated with pubertal timing in women, although the socioendocrinology of the human primate is poorly understood. To better understand social influences on sexual maturation, retrospective data were collected on menarcheal age and family composition from a sample of approximately 1,938 participants from a college population. Absence of a biological father, the presence of half- and step-brothers, and living in an urban environment were associated with earlier menarche. The presence of sisters in the household while growing up, especially older sisters, was associated with delayed menarche. Menarcheal age was not affected by number of brothers in the household, nor was there an effect of birth order. Body weight and race were also associated with menarche. The present findings advance the literature as they are suggestive of putative human pheromones that modulate sexual maturation to promote gene survival and prevent inbreeding, as occurs in rodents and nonhuman primates.

I really ask myself what this stuff is good for. This means that humans are influenced and controlled by things which they don't even know about. I don't like this thought.

 

[El_Guero]

PS

XD

I think you are concerned that if you find a real discipler, you will have to mature in your faith.

That is the purpose of finding a discipler . . . IMHO.

 

[Gold Dragon]

There is a lot of bad science in the posts here.

Research like the one cited in the OP is pretty well known in the science world.

It is obvious that hormones have an strong impact on human behaviour. That is why women have PMS and monthly cycles that are not just about biological changes and teenage boys are "hormonal" while older men are less so.

Pheromones are also a real part of human physiology.

Women at their most fertile in their cycle have different responses to things including smell. Smell is especially important since the sense of smell comes from the brain stem or "lower brain" which controls much more of our non-conscious functions like breathing and heart rate. In many ways, our sense of smell is the most "animal-like" of all our senses. The other senses go to the cortex of the brain or "upper brain". What is smell? It is simply molecules entering our nose and illiciting a nervous response to our brain. Is that experience the same every time the molecules hit the receptors in our nose? Most definitely not. It depends on several factors including whether we have been sensitized to that smell. And as pheromone research suggests, it also depends on the hormonal environment in our body, at least for women.

Pheromone research is also a huge part of the perfume/cologne and consumer scent industries.

While humans are different from animals, the reality of the existence of phermones and its effect on humans is not "proof" of evolution. Although it is one of many scientific realities that supports a strong biological relationship between humans and the rest of the animal kingdom. We are all made of the same biological stuff, DNA coding for proteins in cells that form tissues which form organs and structures.

Why do Christians oppose real science simply because it can reinforce the relationship that we know already exists?

Taking a anatomical cross section of an animal looks very similar to that of a human. Looking microscopically and you can't tell the difference between most animal tissues and human tissues.

I guess my anatomy mid-term last week is causing me to have anatomy on the brain right now.

 

[xdisciplex]

Women at their most fertile in their cycle have different responses to things including smell. Smell is especially important since the sense of smell comes from the brain stem or "lower brain" which controls much more of our non-conscious functions like breathing and heart rate. In many ways, our sense of smell is the most "animal-like" of all our senses. The other senses go to the cortex of the brain or "upper brain".

And why do we have such a rather primitive brain stem which is non-conscious? Evolutionists simply say that this is the "oldest" part of the brain which we have inherited from our ancestors. I mean I always hear this stuff that God wants us to control our body and to subject our body to our spirit and so on. How in the world is this supposed to happen when there are so many things which affect us which we aren't even aware of? To me this makes no sense at all. Somehow this seems to reduce everything to totally primitive instincts such as the sense of smell. Like a dog who runs round outside smelling on everything. :tear:
This is a depressing thoughts. This makes me feel like a primitive caveman who is smarter than an ape but reacts to the same primitive stimuli.
This makes everything look totally materialistic. Where is the role of the spirit in this? I don't see much room for the spirit in this at all. Everything seems to be based on hormones and neurotransmitters and molecules. They even have Oxytocin products which contain Oxytocin which makes people trust you more because this chemical makes people trust each other. How crazy is this?
This means a person simply has to use this stuff and then I'll trust her and not even know why, this means humans are like dumb puppets which can be manipulated with hormones and all these things. This really makes me doubt this whole stuff with the spirit who is supposed to be in control. Where is the spirit when everything is based on the brain and when everything happens in the brain and can be explained? When I'm happy or sad then I'm happy or sad because of stuff which happens in the brain, it's as simple as that. This leaves no room for the spirit. When people go to church and sing and worship then they're happy because the get some rush and react upon it and they think they're happy because their spirit rejoices when everything simply happens in the brain, this makes everything look so ridiculous. :BangHead:

 

[Gold Dragon]

And why do we have such a rather primitive brain stem which is non-conscious? Evolutionists simply say that this is the "oldest" part of the brain which we have inherited from our ancestors. I mean I always hear this stuff that God wants us to control our body and to subject our body to our spirit and so on. How in the world is this supposed to happen when there are so many things which affect us which we aren't even aware of? To me this makes no sense at all. Somehow this seems to reduce everything to totally primitive instincts such as the sense of smell. Like a dog who runs round outside smelling on everything. :tear:

Well for one thing, if we had to consciously think about breathing and beating our heart, there would be a lot more suffocations and heart attacks when people's minds get distracted by something important. Things like digestion and widening our pupils in the dark would also be difficult to maintain if they required conscious thought. Even though we breathe unconsciously, we still have the ability to hold our breath and override that reflex (to a certain extent - our body does not allow us to suffocate by holding our breath because when you black out, you will breathe again). Just because we have more primitive instincts, doesn't mean those instincts govern everything.

This is a depressing thoughts. This makes me feel like a primitive caveman who is smarter than an ape but reacts to the same primitive stimuli.
This makes everything look totally materialistic. Where is the role of the spirit in this? I don't see much room for the spirit in this at all.

We are body and spirit. Just because we are spirit doesn't mean that the body doesn't affect things. Just because we are body doesn't mean the spirit can't affect things. The body can affect the spirit just as much as the spirit can affect the body.

Everything seems to be based on hormones and neurotransmitters and molecules. They even have Oxytocin products which contain Oxytocin which makes people trust you more because this chemical makes people trust each other. How crazy is this?
This means a person simply has to use this stuff and then I'll trust her and not even know why, this means humans are like dumb puppets which can be manipulated with hormones and all these things. This really makes me doubt this whole stuff with the spirit who is supposed to be in control.

Neutrotransmitters, hormones and molecules definitely play a large role in our physiology. But that doesn't mean they control everything. Your oxytocin example is currently more science fiction than science fact. There is a relationship between oxytocin and trust. That doesn't mean you can make people puppets that bend to your will with oxytocin.

Where is the spirit when everything is based on the brain and when everything happens in the brain and can be explained? When I'm happy or sad then I'm happy or sad because of stuff which happens in the brain, it's as simple as that. This leaves no room for the spirit. When people go to church and sing and worship then they're happy because the get some rush and react upon it and they think they're happy because their spirit rejoices when everything simply happens in the brain, this makes everything look so ridiculous. :BangHead:

If everything that happened in our brains could be explained, neurologists and neurosurgeons would have a much easier time at their jobs. While we know a lot more about our brain and nervous system than 100 years ago, its function is still largely a huge void to scientists.

As I said earlier, we are body and spirit.

Being able to explain some things biologically does not mean all things can be explained biologically. Just because pheromones exist does not mean that all physical attraction is pheromone based.

 

[xdisciplex]

But what things are controlled by the spirit for example? I don't see the spirit doing anything. Let's say the spirit causes emotions like joy or fear then where is the difference between this and emotions which are not caused by the spirit? How do we even know wether the spirit does anything?
I also read something about scientists proving that faith actually happens in the brain. They put a christian in a PET scan and this way they could show which areas of the brain are used to create faith. If this is true then how do we even know if faith isn't simply something which is totally based on the brain?
And just because we don't understand the brain completely doesn't mean that there has to be a spirit.
And all these christians which think that their spirit is in charge and that they control their bodies and "reign" over their flesh might be totally wrong without even knowing it.
With all these hormones influencing us how do we even know wether we really love a person or wether or body simply react in a certain way to this person? Maybe we're just slaves to our brains and only think that we are in control when in reality it's just the other way around.