Post: #1

Human Pheromone Sciences, Inc. (OTC Bulletin Board: EROX) today announced results for the three and six months ended June 30, 2009.

Posted on Fri, 14 Aug 2009 03437 GMT at

Post: #2

From the press release:

"Human Pheromone Sciences, Inc. is a technology-based company, whose proof-of concept products included prestige-priced fragrances and toiletries and environmental products sold under the Natural Attraction®, REALM®, innerREALM® and EROX® trademarks. These products contain mood-enhancing compounds, whose efficacy has been validated at leading universities around the world, and whose use is covered under United States and foreign patents."

As I recall, their patents were for chemical signals that acted via the non-functional human VNO. And, the definition of pheromones doesn't include anything about mood enhancement. For some additional spin-doctoring see the naturalattraction.com site, which states that the chemicals affect behavior, although none of this companies studies have show behavioral effects. Also, though perhaps I missed it; the naturalattraction.com site does not mention the human VNO.

James V. Kohl

Post: #3

Whooo Hey look they signed on with dial corp who makes that new soap everyone is raving about. What it called ??? Dial magnet or something to that effect

Tish

Post: #4

I don't think this is a good thing. Marketers continue to misrepresent androstadienone as a human pheromone that acts via the VNO, when humans do not have a functional VNO.

This is just one more indication that marketers can call anything a pheromone, and get people -- now even a large corporation -- to buy into unsubstantiated claims.

Meanwhile, there's scientific information about the importance of human pheromones, and what can be done with them, that is largely ignored to favor a sex sells approach.

James V. Kohl

(09-06-2009 12:30 PM)Tisha Wrote:  Whooo Hey look they signed on with dial corp who makes that new soap everyone is raving about. What it called ??? Dial magnet or something to that effect

Tish

Post: #5

(09-07-2009 2:48 PM)jvkohl Wrote:  I don't think this is a good thing. Marketers continue to misrepresent androstadienone as a human pheromone that acts via the VNO, when humans do not have a functional VNO.

This is just one more indication that marketers can call anything a pheromone, and get people -- now even a large corporation -- to buy into unsubstantiated claims.

Meanwhile, there's scientific information about the importance of human pheromones, and what can be done with them, that is largely ignored to favor a sex sells approach.

James V. Kohl

They do misrepresent the way in which mones work in there video presentation. Maybe you should send them a letter or email with some links educating them that they are wrong about the vno portion of the presentation.

If you stress that pheromones do work but just not in the way they are dipicting them to maybe they will rework the video. It is a clever presentation though, you gotta give them that.

Here is the link to the presentation. They have 3 short films that are really funny.

Post: #6

(09-13-2009 4:44 AM)Tisha Wrote:  They do misrepresent the way in which mones work in there video presentation. Maybe you should send them a letter or email with some links educating them that they are wrong about the vno portion of the presentation.

Their misrepresentation is typical. More product marketing than not states the effect is via the VNO, and they make it appear that the VNO effect is on behavior -- sometimes by citing studies where clearly no affect on behavior was shown. There are no studies, other than those I have presented with a student researcher and her professor, that show behavioral affect.

(09-13-2009 4:44 AM)Tisha Wrote:  If you stress that pheromones do work but just not in the way they are dipicting them to maybe they will rework the video. It is a clever presentation though, you gotta give them that.

I agree that it is a very clever presentation, and they obviously put a lot of thought (and concern for litigious claims) into it. Clearly, they imply many things with no statement of cause and effect. I'm relatively certain that the video will work well enough for them, and work long enough, as well. Even though there is proof that androstadienone is a very unlikely active ingredient, misrepresentations work on the unsuspecting public.

The cosmetic companies are well-informed about the latest research in this regard, as there are always representatives present at the appropriate annual meetings of olfactory researchers. A colleague will address most of this, I suspect, in his forthcoming book: The Great Pheromone Myth.

James V. Kohl