Originally posted by dadudemonThat does not mean it doesn't exist. Ever hear of "reefer madness"? That is one of the "quack" things that come to mind.
It doesn't exist medically nor scientifically.
Psychosomatism is just occult medicine with no valid facts or scientific data to support it.
Originally posted by dadudemon[QUOTE=10221403]Originally posted by dadudemon
[B]No I think you are disagreeing for the sake of disagreement. They are sensed by the olfactory epithelium. Period.
No. It's not just olfactory epithelium. It's simply the 'input' of the CNS.
It's much more complicated that you would make it sound.
You're still focused on the nose. It goes beyond that. The nose is nearly a doorway which invites a number of hosts to be triggered by the CNS. Certain chemical signals require certain hormones.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Oh really? You mean you have never heard of a women who loves a certain smell or food and then after they have a child, the smell actually makes them nauseated.
The scent of food or the scent of a particular object has in no shape or form a relationship to pheromones.
Pheromones isn't a "smell". It's a chemical agent that's specifically designed to trigger steroid hormone production and transfer in the body.
You're foolishly equating the smell of pizza to a phermone.
This is just wrong on many levels.
Originally posted by dadudemon
psychosomatism ..sometimes to the point of seemingly psychosomatic manifest ions such as red to teared eyes, and vomiting? I am not sure if we are using "sensitivity" in the same way.
"Manifest ions"?
What sci-fi book did you pull this out of.
Lay off the pot...
Originally posted by dadudemon
Wait...my fault, you think psychosomatism is similar to Santa Claus. 😄
Psychosomatism doesn't exist in the way you think it exists. Psychosomatism in true definition is when the body reacts to stress. The most common reaction is ulcers.
However you're preaching psychosomatic medicine, which doesn't fly and doesn't make any sense.
If you wanna go down, the 'alternative' medical science route be my guest but you have no scientific evidence to back it.
It's bullshit medicine.
These 'doctors' quite literally say that psychological stress or moods can influence the body to 'create' so-called "diseases".
Like cancer. And via psychosomatic medicine, you can 'cure' cancer by adapting a positive psychic state.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Also, your above statement means that you have never heard of down-regulations or up-regulations either, right? heh heh 😖hifty:
I've heard of tachyphylaxis and it's counterpart.
But they don't have anything to do with pheromones.
They have more in part to do with hormones that the body is deficient or abundant in.
It's similar to vitamin deficiency.
You're attempting to further your argument with butchered science. Up/down regulations only occur during hormonal imbalance.
And they are for the most part temporary (the body eventually reaches homeostatis) unless drugs like nicotine are involved.
Originally posted by dadudemon
AHA! And this is where I have you.
No, you really, really don't....
Originally posted by dadudemon
Ever hear of someone sweating because of mood? Ever hear of someone whose skin hurts to the touch because of mood? Ever hear of someone loses control over their bladder or bowels because of "mood"? Ever "hear" of someone have a heart attack because of mood? Ever hear of someone's resting metabolism take a nose dive because of mood? Ever hear of someone get a headache because of mood? Ever hear of someone becoming much stronger because of "mood"?
You're referring to adrenal and serotonin neurotransmitters.
Yes, these hormones can have that effect on the body.
However, again, you misunderstand.
You're underestimating the quantity of hormones. You're overestimating the significance of certain hormones. And you're misunderstanding the effects of certain hormones.
I stand by my statement. Certain hormones can only influence certain bodily events. They cannot influence the entiriety of the CNS.
Originally posted by dadudemon
The entire CNS is so connected throughout our body that it is difficult for a complex organism like a human to keep from "affecting" the CNS with mood.
Again, no. Wrong.
You simply don't have the knowledge of the complexity of our endocrine system much less the CNS.
You're foolishly assuming that feelings and emotions can influence the CNS' day to day activities. There are thousands of types of neurotransmitters and only a small handful have any connection to "moods" or reactions to stress.
If our moods could influence the entire CNS like you would like it to believe, we could stop hearts with a thought. We could interuppt kidney tissue production.
Think about it. If our "moods" and emotions were as powerful as you say, we could wreck havoc with bodily functions.
Feeling sad? Well that may cause gluconeogenesis to halt.
Feeling happy? Well that may cause the body to stop producing white blood cells via leukotrienes.
Again, you're clearly delving into psychosomatic medicine. You're clearly a stanch believer in the "mind over body" approach which has no scientific basis either than the misunderstanding of biology.
Originally posted by dadudemon
The body is not a simple system of independent yet functional mechanisms that keep it in "motion". The body is a complex organ system of synergistic mechanisms that can almost all be influenced in a slight way by the mind.
Again, with the psychosomatic medicine.
You clearly believe that the mind controls the body.
That the consciousness controls the unconscious.
That you can 'will' cancer or AIDS away if you keep a positive attitude.
Emotions and moods can only affect so much of our bodily activities. Our heart will beat regardless of our moods. Protein synthesis will occur regardless of how positive or negative we feel.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Spend a fews years in an ICU and then observe how much the mind really influences "medicine".
Yes, I'm sure your time in ICU was shortened by your incredible mind powers.....
Originally posted by dadudemon
Actually, you are wrong. "Mood" is influenced by MUCH more than just serotonin. Surely you have heard of monoamine neurotransmitters?
Yes, I've just said numerous times, that serotonin was a monoamine. I didn't say it was the ONLY one.
I'm the one arguing that there are thousands of neurotransmitters, after all.
Serotonin is simply the most abundant and relevant however.
Originally posted by dadudemon
You are now trying to convince me that specific hormones serve as the "detecters" of pheromones?
Yes.
These are called steroid hormones.
Do you really, really think that a passing hormone can just react to pheromones even it has no function regarding to it?
Hormones or rather chemical signals like androstadienone are like Legos or puzzle pieces.
They can only fit with certain chemical signals and with certain cells.
Androstadienone, a male pheromone, a derivative of testosterone, a steroid hormone, is only detected by steroid hormones because they can only "fit" with steroid hormones.
Phermones have to do with sex. And sex really only pertains to a handful of hormones.
Originally posted by dadudemon
I don't want to call you a fraud just yet...so please, cite your source for that information.
This is coming from the "Cure cancer if you feel positive!" psychosomatic advocate....?
Originally posted by dadudemon
My premise is speculation based on known information.
Speculation being the key word.
Vast, vast amounts of speculation based on known but incredibly misinterpreted scientific information...
Originally posted by dadudemon
You are trying to justify a counter argument based on what appears to be, incorrect information.
No, it's basic biology. Like high school biology.
It's also common sense.
Specific hormones can only emit certain chemical signals and can only react or detect certain chemicals in the body.
There are literally thousands of hormones with different functions.
And these functions are assigned to specific roles to play.
Phermones are only detected by certain hormones because that's what they're made to do.
A parathyroid hormone wouldn't even register phermones much less react to it.
Originally posted by dadudemon
1. If you make claims like that, you of course need to cite a source.
You mean like you "cited" your psychosomatic medicine rant.
Which is smart. Your cites wouldn't be reliable.
As for my cite, type in "pheromones" or "androstadienone" in wikipedia or even google.
Or you know, just read up on biology.
Originally posted by dadudemon
My argument was not based on mood. You took the word I used and ran with it. Now I have had to use that word in a previous response to you.
Apparently "mood" is the only word you can use to describe your pseudo-science which doesn't exist.
Originally posted by dadudemon
3. You think that monamine neurotransmitters are the only hormones that are related to one's "mood".
Mood are largely determined in part by monoamine neurotransmitters.
True, outside influences are a large part as well.
An emotional state of anger or stress can cause monamine neurotransmitters to interact with other hormones particularly if there is an abundance. These hormones are called sympathomimetic monoamine hormones. The most common being adrenaline.
Originally posted by dadudemon
They most certainly CAN influence sexuality.
Monoamine neurostransmitters have nothing to do with sexuality (which I mean sexual characteristics in the body). From serotonin to tryptophan, none of them have any impact on sexuality.
That job is up to androgens.
Originally posted by dadudemon
You are thinking in microscopic anatomical terms when you should be thinking in behavioral terms as they relate to their chemical influences.
I brought up hormones and what not because we're dealing with phermones and you were butching the scientific facts of phermones.
I never brought up behavior with involves psychology more than microbiology...
Originally posted by dadudemon
I may be misinterpreting you and you are actually meaning "...cannot influence sexual orientation." If that is what you mean....THEN I DISAGREE AGAIN!!!
Based on?
You can disagree but you have to say why you disagree that hormones cannot influence or change sexual orientation.
You're just disagreeing for the heck of it.
If sexual orientation was purely determined by androgen horomones, than it would a simply matter to correct it.
For example, what hormonal changes would be required to change a gay man to a straight man? Or vice versa?
More testosterone? Less cortisol?
Originally posted by dadudemon
Dude, even if you cite a dozen articles, you will still be wrong about this...
Yes, this party why psychosomatic medicine is more a "faith" rather than an actual science.
And I'm wrong, because of...?
Since you're so knowledgeable and clearly smarter than any scientists in the world studying homosexuality and hormones, what hormone changes would be required to change a gay man to a straight man. Specifically, I mean.
Originally posted by dadudemon
the brain disagrees sometimes with what the body tells it, it should do...
What in hell are you talking about?
The brain is part of the body.
The body doesn't "tell" the brain anything.
The brain tells the rest of the body what to do.
You're clearly stating that the human consciousness is strong enough to actively change bodily functions. Which has no scientific weight whatsoever.
Originally posted by dadudemon
pheromones was just a thought but actually, it doesn't have to be pheromones at all that make a measurable difference.
Well, we could go into genetics but I'm afraid you'd mess that up too.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Since sexuality CAN be all in the mind,
No, no, no.
Sexuality in it's correct definition is both 'body' and 'mind'.
However the mind cannot change the base directive of the body's sexuality.
Originally posted by dadudemon
it may just be more related to monamine neurotransmitters than it is pheromone sensory from the olfactory system. Think about it.
What are monamine neurotransmitters? Seriously. The above statement is that erroneuous.
I'm starting to think you really have no real knowledge of biology and you're just parrotfashioning my 'big' words without any real understanding of them.
Monamine neurotransmitters have nothing, I repeat, nothing to do with sexuality, sexual characteristics or the reproductive system in the body.
Name one, just one monamine neurotransmitter that has any impact on a body's day to day sexuality process.
Originally posted by dadudemon
BTW, putting merit into pheromone's influence on behavior is not very good science.
*snigger*
Sorry, you used science like you knew what it was.
Pheromones can influence behavior. However they are not the end all indication of sexual behavior.
Pheromones merely show that there is a biological basis to homosexuality or human sexuality in the body.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Well, you really have gone off track. My premise was the person changed their orientation and their sensitivities to sex pheromones could have incidentally changed.
Since you're so inclined to "cite" sources (this'll be a trip...)
Cite your own....
A person can change their sexual orientation? News to me.
Based on what?
Your premise that a change in sexual orientation in relation to change to reactions to sex pheromones is correct.
If a gay person goes straight, his androgens must now like estrogen rather than testosterone.
Unfortunately, you have no proof of a gay person going straight other than another tragic Brokeback Mountain story of a gay man who was forced to lie to himself and his family to be 'normal'.
Originally posted by dadudemon
I would like to see this actually measured.
And I would like to know if unicorn hair is a good remedy for eczema....
Originally posted by dadudemon
A This would be VERY difficult to measure because how would one know if someone would change from "straight" to "gay" or "gay" to "straight" and THEN make a follow measurement once they did change?
That's a VERY good question.
How WOULD you know that a person really went gay-to-straight or vice versa.
You stated you knew gay men who went straight. Ever think they were lying? Or deluding themselves. Heck, I bet they're cheating on their wives right now with a john in a public restroom.
A measurement wouldn't be possible because of lies. We have no real nor convienent way to tell a homosexual from a heterosexual other than a costly lab experiment.
A gay to straight male would be impossible to measure because they could've been straight in the first place. If they only react to female pheromones, than they're straight. But it doesn't prove they "converted" other than their own testimony.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Also, the "reactionary response" was actually a measurement of brain activation.
Could this brain activation actually change with a sexual orientation change?
That would require changing the brain and it's functions.
As said, if somehow a wizard made a gay person turn straight with a mojo spell, than yes, the reactionary response would be different.
Originally posted by dadudemon
In bisexuals, does the hypothalamus show a response for both pheromones measured? Are there those who are "straight" but react as if homosexual and vice versa?
These questions haven't been answered. More studies are needed.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Well, since you botched up the premise of your argument, your conclusion is unsound.
Based on? Your 'conclusion' isn't based on facts or science for that matter. It's based on thoughts, desires, personal opinions and yes, plain ol' bigotry.
Originally posted by dadudemon
It is a measureable change to pheromone reaction as a function of sexual behavior that I posited.
A 'measurable' 'change' you scientifically measure (unless you throw the scientific method outta the window) that is based on wild postulations that you haven't proved or given any factual evidence for.
Originally posted by dadudemon
You can't conclude this debate with a psychological conclusion when you have been building your point from a medical perspective.
You're misunderstanding. I think your psychosomatic medicine approach is bullshit and isn't scientifically sound. You argued that certain emotions and moods can influence apparently the entire CNS and endocrine system, which isn't true.
Originally posted by dadudemon
You went from medical to psychological in a heart beat.
No, I went from fact and correcting you to basically saying your argument is entirely misinformed and kinda crazy....
You have to understand, I basically feel like I'm arguing against a Scientologist.....which may make complete sense considering their 'beliefs'.
Originally posted by dadudemon
You wouldn’t even be considered for a peer review if this was your conclusion.
Yeah, about the word "peer". It involves two arguements with facts and evidence backing it.
Which you don't have. You're just attempting to swerve the argument into a philosophical drama that I want no part in....
Originally posted by dadudemon
You never cited a study that shows that the reactionary response to pheromones never changes, which would be one way to shoot my theory down.
Because it's impossible to measure unless there's trace evidence of that change.
You on the other hand again with the word "cite" when you never cite anything of your own.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Your conclusion is actually dead wrong because some people who are straight become gay and vice versa.
.
Based on?
What evidence do you have?
What conclusion can you determine based on your evidence?
Oh and please cite.
I have pretty much every major and well-respected medical board on my side.
You probably have a sketchy amateur site with neon bold letters or a church....
Originally posted by dadudemon
No, gay men like men.
And testosterone. They unconsciously like that too. If they didn't, they wouldn't be gay.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Pheromone response should be almost incidental to sexual orientation.
Yep, you got one right, finally.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Do you think that there are homosexual men running around out there who did not have any genetic predisposition to homosexuality but still selected homosexuality as their primary sexual orientation….and vice versa.
No. But clearly you do. I mean you must have so much raw data from the fields of sociology or psychology to show that a person really does consciously choose his or hers sexual orientation. I mean, you're so convinced of it so you should have evidence in abounds.
Originally posted by dadudemon
My knowledge comes primarily from my own personal studies.
Yeah, I know.
That much is obvious.
Your speculation, your "facts", your "conclusions", your....everything isn't based on a single valid fact.
It's your personal opinion based on faith, character, personal experience and belief.
Which I can't argue against because you're going to believe it regardless of the evidence.
Originally posted by inimalist
Draco, why aren't somatoform disorders "psychosomatism"?
Yes.
But dademon..whatever it's spelled...it's attributing somatoform disorders as a basis that stress or "moods" can change the body as whole.
Which isn't sound.
Somatoform disorders is really just an overload of catecholamines. It acts in the same way that the body overloads on vitamin K or A.
Originally posted by Draco69
It doesn't exist medically nor scientifically.Psychosomatism is just occult medicine with no valid facts or scientific data to support it.
No. It's not just olfactory epithelium. It's simply the 'input' of the CNS.
It's much more complicated that you would make it sound.You're still focused on the nose. It goes beyond that. The nose is nearly a doorway which invites a number of hosts to be triggered by the CNS. Certain chemical signals require certain hormones.
The scent of food or the scent of a particular object has in no shape or form a relationship to pheromones.
Pheromones isn't a "smell". It's a chemical agent that's specifically designed to trigger steroid hormone production and transfer in the body.
You're foolishly equating the smell of pizza to a phermone.
This is just wrong on many levels.
"Manifest ions"?
What sci-fi book did you pull this out of.
Lay off the pot...
Psychosomatism doesn't exist in the way you think it exists. Psychosomatism in true definition is when the body reacts to stress. The most common reaction is ulcers.
However you're preaching psychosomatic medicine, which doesn't fly and doesn't make any sense.
If you wanna go down, the 'alternative' medical science route be my guest but you have no scientific evidence to back it.
It's bullshit medicine.
These 'doctors' quite literally say that psychological stress or moods can influence the body to 'create' so-called "diseases".
Like cancer. And via psychosomatic medicine, you can 'cure' cancer by adapting a positive psychic state.
I've heard of tachyphylaxis and it's counterpart.
But they don't have anything to do with pheromones.
They have more in part to do with hormones that the body is deficient or abundant in.
It's similar to vitamin deficiency.
You're attempting to further your argument with butchered science. Up/down regulations only occur during hormonal imbalance.
And they are for the most part temporary (the body eventually reaches homeostatis) unless drugs like nicotine are involved.
No, you really, really don't....
You're referring to adrenal and serotonin neurotransmitters.
Yes, these hormones can have that effect on the body.
However, again, you misunderstand.
You're underestimating the quantity of hormones. You're overestimating the significance of certain hormones. And you're misunderstanding the effects of certain hormones.
I stand by my statement. Certain hormones can only influence certain bodily events. They cannot influence the entiriety of the CNS.
Again, no. Wrong.
You simply don't have the knowledge of the complexity of our endocrine system much less the CNS.
You're foolishly assuming that feelings and emotions can influence the CNS' day to day activities. There are thousands of types of neurotransmitters and only a small handful have any connection to "moods" or reactions to stress.
If our moods could influence the entire CNS like you would like it to believe, we could stop hearts with a thought. We could interuppt kidney tissue production.
Think about it. If our "moods" and emotions were as powerful as you say, we could wreck havoc with bodily functions.
Feeling sad? Well that may cause gluconeogenesis to halt.
Feeling happy? Well that may cause the body to stop producing white blood cells via leukotrienes.
Again, you're clearly delving into psychosomatic medicine. You're clearly a stanch believer in the "mind over body" approach which has no scientific basis either than the misunderstanding of biology.
Again, with the psychosomatic medicine.
You clearly believe that the mind controls the body.
That the consciousness controls the unconscious.
That you can 'will' cancer or AIDS away if you keep a positive attitude.
Emotions and moods can only affect so much of our bodily activities. Our heart will beat regardless of our moods. Protein synthesis will occur regardless of how positive or negative we feel.
Yes, I'm sure your time in ICU was shortened by your incredible mind powers.....
Yes, I've just said numerous times, that serotonin was a monoamine. I didn't say it was the ONLY one.
I'm the one arguing that there are thousands of neurotransmitters, after all.
Serotonin is simply the most abundant and relevant however.
Yes.
These are called steroid hormones.
Do you really, really think that a passing hormone can just react to pheromones even it has no function regarding to it?
Hormones or rather chemical signals like androstadienone are like Legos or puzzle pieces.
They can only fit with certain chemical signals and with certain cells.
Androstadienone, a male pheromone, a derivative of testosterone, a steroid hormone, is only detected by steroid hormones because they can only "fit" with steroid hormones.
Phermones have to do with sex. And sex really only pertains to a handful of hormones.
This is coming from the "Cure cancer if you feel positive!" psychosomatic advocate....?
Speculation being the key word.
Vast, vast amounts of speculation based on known but incredibly misinterpreted scientific information...
No, it's basic biology. Like high school biology.
It's also common sense.
Specific hormones can only emit certain chemical signals and can only react or detect certain chemicals in the body.
There are literally thousands of hormones with different functions.
And these functions are assigned to specific roles to play.
Phermones are only detected by certain hormones because that's what they're made to do.
A parathyroid hormone wouldn't even register phermones much less react to it.
You mean like you "cited" your psychosomatic medicine rant.
Which is smart. Your cites wouldn't be reliable.
As for my cite, type in "pheromones" or "androstadienone" in wikipedia or even google.
Or you know, just read up on biology.
Apparently "mood" is the only word you can use to describe your pseudo-science which doesn't exist.
I was watching a show on the Discovery Channel about moths and butterflies, and according to the narrator: "a pheromone is any odor secreted by an animal to comminicate with members of the same species".
So if you can't smell it, then what good is that? That kills the purpose of a pheromone.
Nice sources? 😄
Originally posted by Draco69
It doesn't exist medically nor scientifically.Psychosomatism is just occult medicine with no valid facts or scientific data to support it.
That's pretty damned wrong. Why don't you study a little bit more about it and get back to me on it? You can pretend it doesn't exist but it does. You may know it by another names like psychophysiologic.
Originally posted by Draco69
No. It's not just olfactory epithelium. It's simply the 'input' of the CNS.
It's much more complicated that you would make it sound.You're still focused on the nose. It goes beyond that. The nose is nearly a doorway which invites a number of hosts to be triggered by the CNS. Certain chemical signals require certain hormones.
What the body does with the "data" once it is collected is what you are describing. You are arguing for the sake to disagree. You know that I am 100% right about this. You are arguing a point to be right about something I am not debating.
Case in point, odor molecules are "sensed" by olfactory receptors. Of course there is a lot of signal transduction that occurs before the brain goes 'ZOMG!!! pheromone!!!!".
Originally posted by Draco69
The scent of food or the scent of a particular object has in no shape or form a relationship to pheromones.Pheromones isn't a "smell". It's a chemical agent that's specifically designed to trigger steroid hormone production and transfer in the body.
You're foolishly equating the smell of pizza to a phermone.
This is just wrong on many levels.
Bla bla bla.
Sensitivities to hormones can change through cell site receptor saturation. This does not mean the receptor itself becomes less sensitive, but rather, the cell becomes less able to react to specific cell site receptor activation because it has less of those specific receptors to be modulated. This is NOT what I meant. I was referring to differing behaviors to the same sensory input.
Originally posted by Draco69
"Manifest ions"?What sci-fi book did you pull this out of.
Lay off the pot...
"manifestations". I was using a wireless keyboard and mouse. Also, I have never smoked pot at any point in my entire life. 😄
Originally posted by Draco69
Psychosomatism doesn't exist in the way you think it exists. Psychosomatism in true definition is when the body reacts to stress. The most common reaction is ulcers.
What? So now you give it credence? The "truuuuuee" definition, hmmmm?
I didn't read any of this but it was the first thing that came up...
http://www.surgerydoor.co.uk/medical_conditions/Indices/P/psychosomatic_disorders.htm
Originally posted by Draco69
However you're preaching psychosomatic medicine, which doesn't fly and doesn't make any sense.If you wanna go down, the 'alternative' medical science route be my guest but you have no scientific evidence to back it.
It's bullshit medicine.
These 'doctors' quite literally say that psychological stress or moods can influence the body to 'create' so-called "diseases".
Like cancer. And via psychosomatic medicine, you can 'cure' cancer by adapting a positive psychic state.
What ever you say. You seem to know more about homeopathic medicine than I do.
Originally posted by Draco69
I've heard of tachyphylaxis and it's counterpart.But they don't have anything to do with pheromones.
They have more in part to do with hormones that the body is deficient or abundant in.
It's similar to vitamin deficiency.
You're attempting to further your argument with butchered science. Up/down regulations only occur during hormonal imbalance.
And they are for the most part temporary (the body eventually reaches homeostatis) unless drugs like nicotine are involved.
Homeostatis? ZOMG wut the hell is that? Is that from your science fiction books?LOL!!! Do you see how lame that is now? 😉
So you went from just hearing about "tachyphylaxis and it's counterpart" to "You're attempting to further your argument with butchered science. Up/down regulations only occur during hormonal imbalance." So you went from knowing a little about it to being an expert?...hmmmmm...😕
I used "sensitivity" in the way it is used commonly. You don't hear people say "Here take this, it would down-regulate your "bla bla" receptor so that more of the "bla bla" receptor can exhibit a stronger response when modulated with this XYZ pharmaceutical." Rather, you would here, "Take this...it will make your more sensitive to this drug so you don't have to take so much."....but this again is a tangent that you decided to argue. You could have just said, 'I agree that they can change through many different mechanisms." and be done with it.
Originally posted by Draco69
No, you really, really don't....
Yup...sure do. 😄
Originally posted by Draco69
You're referring to adrenal and serotonin neurotransmitters.Yes, these hormones can have that effect on the body.
However, again, you misunderstand.
You're underestimating the quantity of hormones. You're overestimating the significance of certain hormones. And you're misunderstanding the effects of certain hormones.
I stand by my statement. Certain hormones can only influence certain bodily events. They cannot influence the entiriety of the CNS.
I can be like you and your olfactory receptor argument and be like "ZOMG...it is sooo totally not simplified down to just adrenal and serotonin neurotransmitters!!! They are just the tip of the iceberg...there is so much more involved with it!!!"...But I think you already know that and you again are arguing for the sake of arguing because you want to get the last point in or you think that somehow you will be wrong.
You're overestimating monoamine neurotransmitters and underestimating the other 50+ neurotransmitters. On top of that, forgetting that behavior cannot be oversimplified down to chemicals.
I mentioned pheromone response as just one of many possibilities to a sexual behavior change. Even IF I am wrong about a measurable change in pheromone response, that most certainly does not explain why people switch poles on the sexual preference spectrum.
This is as far as I got in my down time at work...to be continued...I promise. I will not address any responses to this post until I address you second response to me.
Originally posted by Quiero Mota
But you have to sense it some how.
You do sense them, however the direct effects are largely subconscious.
Parts of your brain process the pheromone, then send the message to the more aware parts. You may become sexually aroused because of the pheromones of some fat ugly broad who just walked by you, but your conscious mind may attribute it to the hot girl you see in front of you.
Originally posted by inimalist
You do sense them, however the direct effects are largely subconscious.Parts of your brain process the pheromone, then send the message to the more aware parts. You may become sexually aroused because of the pheromones of some fat ugly broad who just walked by you, but your conscious mind may attribute it to the hot girl you see in front of you.
A lot of predators will find prey by intercepting their pheromones and tracking them down. How is that subconscious, or not sensed?