Post: #11

Androstenone is actually not secreted by the body directly, but other pheromones do breakdown into Androstenone outside of the body. However, millions of years of evelotion have turned us into a well refined machines and nothing goes to waste.

As Gegogi said "It is produced by the action of bacteria acting on Androstadienone and/or androstenol. Androstenone is the final byproduct of said bacterial action."

What that implies to me is that the process starts with the body secreting comfort and cummunication chemicals to engage the opposite sex, then after engaging the target they brakdown further to signal mating potential.

Maybe I'm wrong, but it makes sense to me.

Post: #12

Quote:Androstenone is actually not secreted by the body directly

Quote:It is produced by the action of bacteria acting on Androstadienone and/or androstenol. Androstenone is the final byproduct of said bacterial action.

I dont agree with this totally and this is why....................


While its true that conversion from bacteria on the skin occurs with Androstadienone . Androstenone is also found inside the body and this has been sited in many medical journals, report and abstracts. It is synthesized in the testes, the main source however is in the Apocrine gland and broken down by axillary bacteria inside the human body. Not on the skin after secretion but within the glands under the skin.



The aprocrine gland is found at junction of the dermis and subcutaneous fat. It has no known function in humans that I have found but in all other mammals the aprocrine gland is associated with pheromonal communication. We are mammals. It becomes functional in humans during puberty which is the onset of sexual maturity in humans. My theory is that it becomes functional during puberty because its time to begin pheromonal signaling. That may very well be its function.



Interesting tid bit........ Asian men have less aprocrine glands then African or Caucasian men. Hence the dosage issues we have always discussed.

JVKohl Wrote:The high concentration of apocrine glands found in the armpits led to the term: "axillary organ", which is considered an independent "organ" of human odor production. Apocrine glands have a tubular, coiled structure and are about 2 mm in diameter [37]. Human apocrine glands develop in the embryo, but become functional only with the onset of puberty [38]. This link between apocrine gland function and puberty reflects that function is closely linked to levels of sex steroid hormones that increase with the onset of adrenarche and puberty. Freshly produced apocrine secretion has no odor [39], and is transformed into odorous products by microorganisms (see [40] for review).
For reasons that remain unclear, humans produce a relatively high amount of odor production, when compared to other primates. The odors of the skin, the saliva, urine and, genital secretions, contribute to the amount and hedonic quality that is characteristic of natural human body odor. In this regard, we note that any odor, even the scent of rose, becomes aversive when it is produced in suprathreshold quantities. Thus, though pheromonal communication typically occurs without consciousness, pheromones, when produced in high concentration, may still have both conscious and aversive effects on others.

Can we stand up and say "Yes this is definitely a pheromone" no because research is on going but just as we cant say with 100% accuracy that it is, it can not be said that its not with that accuracy either.

That's why I feel her portrayal of Androstenone on her site is misleading. However I do agree that if she doesn't like the molecule she shouldn't use it or sell it. According to reports her formulas are good without it. There is no rule it must be used. Perhaps she found Androstanone a better alternative. Perhaps its not the direction she plans to take I would not rule out her mixes just on her personal view on Androstenone. There is more then one way to elicit a sexual response. Androstenone is not the be all and end all of pheromones.

My advice is try her stuff and if it works for you and you like them use them. Its that simple.

Oh and come back here and tell us all about your experience with her mixes.

Tisha

Post: #13

From what I've learned in histology, an apocrine gland is simply an exocrine gland which means that it secretes its products onto a surface directly via a tube or duct. Apocrine specifically just means that it releases the product from the top end, the apical end, hence it's name. They're also found in the mammary gland (milk secretion), eyelids and the ear in addition to the link that Trisha posted (armpits, genitals, areola).

As to whether one can say if our sweat glands produce it... according to what has been said so far, if it is by bacteria, then that is a no. Our sweat glands do not produce it regardless if the bacteria is within the glands. I say that because we do not produce vitamin D in our body. However, we have bacteria such as e. coli in our large intestines that do. Science does not consider that as human production, it is more like mutualism. We provide the bacteria with a suitable environment, protection and food, they give us vitamin D. Why we have bacteria making it and us secreting it, could be an instinctual survival mechanism.

So the only way we produce it, is through excretion via urine. Having it in our urine, maybe for marking just like how dogs mark territory. I think people may react negatively to it because of instincts and/or culture.

I've already put in an order for 2 of her products. It's just unfortunate that she doesn't use -none, as I have seen good results with it. Her last mix I tried used -Androstanone instead. I got inconsistent results. With some of the reports that I've read on her newer, perhaps revised mixes, I decided to give it a shot. Try her products out instead of Liquid Alchemy. Maybe I'll become an -Androstanone believer instead of -Androstenone. =/

Post: #14

Quote:I say that because we do not produce vitamin D in our body.

What about Vitamin D production in the skin?

Post: #15

(08-20-2010 7:47 AM)tezza23 Wrote:  What about Vitamin D production in the skin?

Ah, actually I had forgotten about that. You're right, we produce Vitamin D in our skin in presence of light. The reason for my pointing out the vitamin D example is that even if bacteria produce it, it is not considered human production. There's a thin line between symbiosis (mitochondria/chloroplast) and commensalism (mutualism).

Post: #16

Actually, I got the whole vitamin D thing wrong. I was thinking vitamin K. That is produced by e coli in the large intestines, not vitamin D. O_o;;

Post: #17

Oh right, well K is necessary to use D I believe, and some other very necessary nutrients are produced by symbiotic bacteria (butyric acid for example).