Skip to main content
search
0

Productos a cotizar

Cerrar ventana

Source: Gilbert, Avery: THE WISDOM OF THE NOSE, The science of smell applied to everyday life.Ediciones B, Mexico 2009 (www.averygilbert.com)

How much olfactory capacity do we humans have?

Our olfactory capacity is far superior to what we believe. We have generated, preached and sustained a series of myths against this reality. Except in cases of disease, it is demonstrable that high olfactory capacity is common to all human beings. People with a superior capacity are truly exceptional cases. The olfactory capacity of an ordinary person is sufficient for him to develop as a perfumer, taster or sommelier. New evidence suggests that humans and animals may be more similar in odor perception than we thought. What makes the difference between one person and another lies in the cognitive; that is, in memory. That is, in associating what the sense of smell detects with the name that one remembers: vanilla, cherry, walnut, freshly cut grass... Therefore, to take advantage of our high olfactory capacity, the first step is to accept that we have it; and the second is to be interested and do what is necessary to learn: identify the aromas given off by objects and substances; memorize each aroma with its origin; practice and practice. Since the cognitive aspect is the necessary complement to take advantage of our olfactory capacity, we must also be attentive to "suggestion". That is to say, to mythically attribute effects of a scent.

Some notes from the book

  • Although five taste channels are not inconsiderable, they are rudimentary compared to the 350 different receptors and two dozen perceptual categories available for olfaction.
  • What we usually call "taste" (strawberry, spinach, chocolate, etc.) is actually smell. This happens because we smell what we eat from the inside out. Nowadays this is known as retrotaste or retronasal olfaction, but I prefer the name Finck gave it: a "second olfactory pathway".
  • The world of olfaction is full of irrational beliefs and myths whose only rationale is to glorify some ("so-and-so is the expert, because he has a natural gift") or to amuse and amuse everyone (how impressive!).
  • The olfactory capacity of a human being is so high that some studies have found no adverse effects of smoking.
  • Dogs and humans have an almost identical sensitivity to methyl benzoate, the odor used to locate cocaine.
  • Dogs have big noses but this does not mean that humans do not possess a very high olfactory capacity.
  • The average person probably detects odors at about the same concentration as the professional wine taster. What the expert has are cognitive abilities that make better use of the same sensory information. The advantage of the expert (wine taster, perfumer...) consists more of a cerebral faculty than a nasal faculty, and is based on the regular exercise of these specialized mental capacities.
  • Expert wine tasters outperform novices by relating their own descriptions (which they write down) to wines they have tasted before. Mental discipline helps experts avoid a trap called the "verbal eclipsing effect" that novices can fall into when the effort to generate a verbal label interferes with the perception of the aroma itself.
  • Only people with superior noses can appreciate the subtle effects of the shape of the glass.
  • Perfumers Robert Calkin and Stephen Jellinek believe that a proper nose is enough to do their job. What counts for professional success are specific mental abilities and thought processes.
  • The superiority of female olfaction is partially due to the fact that females possess greater verbal fluency; verbal abilities improve performance on odor memory and odor identification tests.
  • Helen Keller died in 1968, but she remains a symbol of the belief that blindness makes people super-smellers by way of compensation. But it has been proven that the superiority of blind people in odor identification depends on cognitive factors such as memory rather than on extraordinary sharpness of perception.
  • Eating bread and crackers at a wine tasting, or sorbet between courses at a French restaurant, does not sharpen the palate. That is: our olfactory capacity is sufficient and does not need much help from us.
  • Pairing a wine properly is pleasant, but it does not improve the perception of a wine taster. Again: our olfactory capacity is sufficient and does not need much help from us.

Notes on suggestion

  • The commonly recognized power of scent derives largely from the power of suggestion.
  • A judge's expectations of wine change when the glass can be seen.
  • The brain of a patient senses damage in a sensory message that does not cause alarm in a healthy person... Even the most innocuous aromas become objectionable if they remind us of an unpleasant experience.
  • Imagination has a lot to do with the harmful effect of perfumes.
  • What we believe about a smell, and the malevolent power we attribute to it, alters our sensory perceptions and physiological responses. This should come as no surprise: we believe that smell makes us attractive, relaxed, attentive.
  • The scientific study of olfactory memory is currently in a state of flux. After a long and fruitless detour spent quantifying a literary fiction, the idea that smell is unique among the senses is being abandoned.
  • If olfactory memory is like other forms of memory, why is it perceived as so magical that a smell spurs a memory? In large part it has to do with surprise. One wasn't trying to remember the paints, oils, and solvents in Grandpa's workshop, but rather the memory jumps out without one wondering about it, as one passes by a random plume of odor. What is even more surprising: we did not make a deliberate effort to memorize those smells when we were seven years old. If we had, the memory would not surprise us.
Share:

Related articles

If you need more information, please write to us:

Leave a Reply

Close Menu