Study: Women’s Genes to Blame for Short-Term Relationships

By | February 19, 2010 in love? Blame your parents.

University of Western Australia researchers think they may be on to something about women’s attraction. They discovered a woman’s appearance or sweat contains clues to the genetic make-up of her immune system, reported The Telegraph .

The scientists studied the DNA of almost 150 university students. They concluded that women with more variety in their genes are likely to have more boyfriends.

According to The Daily Mail the students also filled out a survey about their love lives.

Scientists scrutinized the DNA for variations in genes known to influence the immune system. The more diverse the genes are, the stronger a person's ability is to fight off disease.

Results of genetic tests were paired up with survey answers. Researchers found that the more varied major histocompability complex (MHC) genes a woman had, the more sexual partners she had.

Scientists are at a loss as to why this is. They can not say why her immune system affects her luck at love. They also do not know if it means the opposite sex can't resist her or she can't resist them, the Daily Mail reports.

Previous studies referred to a person's sweat, saying that the more different a person's sweat is form another person's, the more pleasant the other person finds them.

The Daily Mail reported that this may be a defense to help stop someone from unintentionally having sex with a relative.

As far as men? They can't necessarily blame their parent, or at least their parents' DNA.

No connections were found between their MHC genes and their success with the opposite sex.

via Study: Women’s Genes to Blame for Short-Term Relationships.

9 thoughts on “Study: Women’s Genes to Blame for Short-Term Relationships

  1. Alex

    150 is not sufficient sample size to prove or disprove any generalization related to the whole human race!

    These scientists should read Karl Popper’ theory of falsifiability.

  2. syam

    Alex, I agree with the first part of your arguement that “150 is not sufficient sample size”.

    If scientists follow philosophers like Karl Popper, they will go no where! As per Popper, no finite observations are “enough” to prove any thing. A single instance will disprove the innumerable prior observations…. it goes on like this.

    So, I don’t expect scientists to read the vast but useless literature of Popper.

  3. best detective in hyderabad

    useless literature of Karl Popper?!!

    Popper is one of the first scientists/philosophers who highlighted human epistemic arrogance. He has been an inspiration to scientists who won Nobel prize based on his insights (Amos Tversky; Daniel Kahneman).

Leave a Reply