Hey @… I was just listening to the great literary olfactoloy episode with @allylouks.bsky.social€, but I feel that the existence/role of human pheromones has been a bit misrepresented.
I have worked on mammalian pheromones for my PhD, and I have encountered (at least) two major definitions of the term "pheromone", one based on the function of a substance, and the other, which I personally prefer, on the information flow involved in it (https://doi.org/10.1159/000096511).
Based on the Sbarbati & Osculati definition, a pheromone would be a component that conveys information between individuals of the same species.
There is also quite a bit of research that argues for the existence of human pheromones (e.g. https://doi.org/10.1002/ar.a.20125, https://doi.org/10.1002/ar.a.20125, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1198331)
However, the discussion on the existence of human pheromones is difficult, as it touches on the topic of free will as many reactions to odor are involuntary. During the International Symposium on Olfaction and Taste held in Iceland in 2024, there have been several session on human olfaction touching on sensitive aspects such as olfaction-mediated effects on mate choice and pregnancy, but none of the researchers dared utter the word pheromone, while colleagues working on other mammals where happily talking about pheromonal effects for very similar topics.
Long story short, I feel that saying there is no hard evidence for human pheromones is misrepresenting the current research.