Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Researchers Claim Pheromones Trigger Brain Cell Growth

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on from the crack-open-the-smelling-smarts dept.

The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation is reporting that pheromones could enable the growth of new brain cells. "Pheromone signals from dominant males spark new brain cells in their female partners and could help repair injured brains, suggests a new study by a University of Calgary neuroscientist. Sam Weiss's findings, in the July issue of the journal Nature Neuroscience, provide evidence that pheromones -- subtle chemical signatures that influence mating behavior -- can control stem cells in the brain."

8 of 113 comments (clear)

  1. Human Alpha Males? by Hiween · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The question is how did they choose the dominant males and the subordinate?. You can well go to a company and test with a Manager and young new employee, but I don't think that biologically there are any significant difference (at least not correlated with the dominant/subordinate biological trait). The article is pretty short on details of how the test was conducted.

    1. Re:Human Alpha Males? by catbutt · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well the test was done on mice. In mice dominant males are the ones that females are likely to mate with, so maybe they should say "matable males". For humans, it would probably translate "attractive males", or at least "males that the females in question find sexually attractive".

      I think people are reading too much into the word "dominant".

    2. Re:Human Alpha Males? by Hal_Porter · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You can well go to a company and test with a Manager and young new employee, but I don't think that biologically there are any significant difference (at least not correlated with the dominant/subordinate biological trait).

      Are you kidding? Very senior managers are exactly analogous to the silverback gorillas, the pack alpha males. Middle managers are more like their bitches to be honest than alpha males, though they'll bare their fangs at subordinates a bit if they can get away with it. Mind you as you go down the hierarchy it quickly becomes more meritocratic, mostly because it has to be if the troup is to survive. But watch some documentaries about primates and suddenly the management culture of companies, particularly small ones, will suddenly be sickeningly comprehensible.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
  2. Re:Oh really now? by spikesahead · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Of course, new brain cells don't mean more intelligence.

    New brain cells will accelerate learning and cement patterns in place. If people under the influence learn dumb patterns they will find it harder to break out of those patterns later.

    This is probably one of the major reasons women in abusive relationships can't seem to break away from their abusers. The patterns of behavior become ingrained through this process.

    --
    bend like the reed
  3. Re:Sooo... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Why is it that people insist on thinking that same-sex couples are exactly analogous to opposite-sex couples?

    When you get right down to it, 'male' is not the same as 'female', at least in a biological sense. So of course you should expect that male-male, male-female, and female-female relationships can be pretty different from each other.

  4. Re:Sooo... by bl8n8r · · Score: 3, Insightful

    >Why is it that people insist on thinking that same-sex couples are exactly analogous to opposite-sex couples?

    A need for validation.

    --
    boycott slashdot February 10th - 17th check out: altSlashdot.org
  5. Re:Sooo... by Your.Master · · Score: 2, Insightful

    He didn't insist that. He did the exact opposite. He asked.

  6. Re:Unfortunately, you're not going to find by AmberBlackCat · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Since this seems to be a biological thing rather than a socially engineered one, I'd wonder who is considered the more dominant male in this case. Is it the guy who is big and strong enough to physically force other guys to succumb to him, or is it the guy who is rich enough to make a phone call and have other guys eliminated? I ask this because our economic system seems to give all of the power to the guys with money, but to me the ones who stand on their own seem more attractive.