795
Some men are skipping showers before dates to embrace a new trend called pheromone-maxxing
(lemmy.today)
this post was submitted on 01 Sep 2026
795 points (97.2% liked)
Brand New Sentence
397 readers
877 users here now
Showcasing the brazen and nouveau in English communication.
- Be cool to each other and follow the lemmy.today instance rules.
- Post title must be the sentence, or relevant portion of the sentence if it's very long.
- Link for context if possible.
- Tag NSFW where applicable.
- This instance has no rules against calls to violence, please don't report general wishes for violence. Direct implications of harm (i.e. I will shoot x person in the head) will be moderated at our discretion.
founded 3 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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."