> From: Reggie Bautista <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Jan Coffey wrote: > > > How can you call an organ which does exist "vistigual" without showing > >why > > > you know it doesn't function. Especialy when there is so much anicdotal > > > evidecde to the contrary. > > The Fool replied: > >Because of exhaustive testing by the scientific community? Because > >they've found that most of the genes that create this organ are pseudo > >genes (damaged, nonfunctional) in humans? Because most of the genes that > >code for scent (olfactory) are also pseudo genes? Because humans do not > >respond sexually to pheromones? Because smelling/stinking has been > >selected against for thousands of years? > > Incorrect. There have been scientific studies quoted on this list that show > that the human vomeronasal organ still functions to some extent. The exact > extent has not yet been determined.
And who do you think posted this link about pheromones in the first place? I did? > There was also an article about female sexual response to male pheremones. > I don't remember if it was this article or a related article that was posted > to this list. > http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/living/health/womens_health/5409328.htm > or > http://tinyurl.com/ev7p > Excerpt: > For one six-hour period, extracts from male underarms were applied to > the women's > upper lips. For a second six hours, ethanol, as a control, was applied. > Both the sweat > and the ethanol were mixed with the same fragrance so the women could > not tell the > difference. > > The applications occurred every two hours, after which blood was drawn. > When sweat > was applied, blood tests showed a quicker onset of luteinizing hormone, > or LH, a regulator > of the menstrual cycle. Right before ovulation, there is an LH surge. > Throughout the cycle, > hundreds of smaller amounts of LH are secreted by the pituitary gland. > > [snip] > > This study documents mood and menstrual-cycle effects of male > pheromones - chemical > signals - on women, said George Preti, adjunct professor of dermatology > at the University > Pennsylvania School of Medicine and one of the study's authors. > > Menstrual-cycle effects are, by definition, sexual effects. Therefore, > humans *do* respond sexually to pheremones. Estrus is hidden in human females. In fact when they are menstruating they are __not Fertile__. Sexual signaling in humans has shifted to visual cues. That's why makeup, hairstyles, hosiery, tight clothing, nail polish, eye liner, exist. They are a replacement for the defunct pheromonal sexual signaling system in humans. That's why they call it vestigial. It's function is reduced to nothing or inconsequential effects. Females do not attract males by pheromones. Males do not attract females by pheromones. The only effect scientists have been able to show (and this article that I originally posted confirms that) is that the organ can change the timing of ovulation to match other females, and somewhat to match males. It serves no other known purpose, and will eventually go away (much like how dolphins have hundreds of pseudo genes for scent but have no noses and can't smell at all) as it has extremely little selective advantage. > >You are showing a complete lack of understanding in how science and > >evolution work. > > You are showing a lack of research before speaking up on a topic. See above. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
