634
Some men are skipping showers before dates to embrace a new trend called pheromone-maxxing (thelemmy.club)
submitted 19 hours ago by [M] to c/BrandNewSentence@lemmy.today
212 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 4 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (1 child)

Source? Because, the only info I've come across is a decades-old study that linked aluminum with Alzheimer's which was disproved a year later.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 15 hours ago* (2 children)

    Aluminum dust exposure and risk of neurodegenerative diseases in a cohort of male miners in Ontario, Canada

    https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8504163/

    Aluminium exposure leads to neurodegeneration and alters the expression of marker genes involved to parkinsonism in zebrafish brain https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0045653522022457

    From nature summary

    Aluminum Neurotoxicity in Neurodegenerative Diseases

    "Aluminium crosses the blood–brain barrier via transferrin-mediated pathways and can catalyse the generation of reactive oxygen species, disrupt mitochondrial function and promote neuroinflammatory cascades. At the molecular level, aluminium ions can bind to amyloidogenic proteins, facilitating the oligomerisation of β-amyloid and stabilising hyperphosphorylated tau, thereby amplifying the formation of senile plaques and neurofibrillary tangles characteristic of Alzheimer’s disease. In Parkinson’s disease and other movement disorders, aluminium may contribute to dopaminergic neuronal loss by exacerbating mitochondrial dysfunction and α-synuclein aggregation. Epidemiological studies have detected elevated aluminium levels in post-mortem brain tissue from patients with Alzheimer’s disease, multiple sclerosis and autism spectrum disorder."

    https://www.nature.com/nature-index/topics/l4/aluminum-neurotoxicity-in-neurodegenerative-diseases

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 14 hours ago* (1 child)

    So as long as I'm not a zebrafish or a literal mine worker I should probably be fine then?

    I also note that you're making a suspiciously large number of pro-stinky comments in this thread.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] 3 points 14 hours ago (1 child)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 14 hours ago* (1 child)

    I wasn't insinuating that you were misogynistic, though I can definitely see how that could be taken from my comment in the context of the article.

    I did read the third one, or at least what was available for free. It briefly mentions antiperspirants in passing in the same paragraph that mentions all of the likely much more serious confounding factors (including, for example, actual ingestion) that could be leading to aluminum crossing the blood-brain barrier.

    From your links I'm convinced that I probably shouldn't eat or inhale aluminum, but I see much less reason to avoid anti-perspirants.

    Edit: I'm also skeptical of your Nature link for all of the usual reasons to be wary of meta-studies.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] 1 point 14 hours ago (1 child)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 14 hours ago* (1 child)

    Hi, that was me. This place is pro-science, which is why when people post articles with only the most tenuous possible connection to the conversation at hand in order to promote the pro-stink agenda they're spouting all over the thread, it tends to be quite the turnoff.

    The same way that stinky people tend to be quite the turnoff.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] 3 points 14 hours ago (1 child)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (1 child)

    I don't have to like the science - it just needs to actually be relevant to the conversation (that is, people showering and using deodorant), and not a handful of essentially random studies dug up as flailing, ad-hoc support to a thread-wide crusade against basic hygeine.

    Edit: To be more clear, if I hadn't already noticed all of your other comments spammed around the thread, I probably wouldn't have downvoted the studies you posted. It was the specific impression of disingenuously throwing any science you could at the wall and hoping it stuck that made me want to downvote.

    Same reason I downvote most studies posted by vegans and creationists, actually - the distasteful practice of taking an ideological position and then trying to find/manufacture "science" to support it after the fact.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] 2 points 14 hours ago (1 child)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 14 hours ago* (1 child)

    It's relevant in the same way that equating using a salt scrub in the bath with death from directly eating a pound of table salt is relevant.

    "I really like using my salt scrub - it gives me super smooth skin." "Bro, sodium HAZ negative effects on the body. THIS IS RELEVANT."

    Also, I made a late edit to the above comment that might be of interest since this thread is originally about why I downvoted you.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] 3 points 14 hours ago (1 child)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 14 hours ago* (1 child)

    I don't like eating aluminum. I like licking armpits. I am biased.

    This is a very fair point that I admit I did not take into consideration.

    It's absolutely a reasonable position to not be in favor of anti-perspirant if it's likely you'd be in a position to ingest it, at least for your potential partners specifically.

    That said, I also think that's likely a minority position in the thread, enough so to warrant a disclaimer when you posted the original studies.

    This is especially the case if that fact is what your argument against using anti-perspirants is actually resting on, and you're not just trying to find post-hoc support of your dislike of anti-perspirants in general.

    It still doesn't really explain the studies about miners and zebrafish though.

    We don't have to agree, except on one thing. Chuds suck because they're assholes, not because they stink.

    The closest I can get is "Chuds suck because they're assholes, and the fact that some of them stink is a very small but valid additional reason to not want to be around them."

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •