Sex differences in responding to baby scent: Males more aggressive, women the opposite

Credit: The Cut
Credit: The Cut

Imagine there was an odorless substance that made men less aggressive when they inhaled it but had the opposite effect on women. Sniffing it made women bolder. Would you go online and immediately click “buy”?

There’s no need: Our bodies produce this substance already. Hexadecanal, or HEX, is one of 6,000 volatile chemicals emitted by our body secretions, like tears and sweat, and in HEX’s case, by an infant’s scalp. Chemical signals like HEX fly under our conscious radar while altering our behavior, said Noam Sobel, a professor of neurobiology at Israel’s Weizmann Institute of Science, who calls his lab “very nose-centric.”

Two experiments—recently published in the journal Science Advances by Prof. Sobel, data scientist Eva Mishor and a team of colleagues—revealed that breathing in HEX influences our social behavior, dialing up aggression in women but attenuating it in men.

Mis- and disinformation are distorting science and public policy. Subscribe to our Daily and Weekly Digests for incisive coverage of ‘disruptive’ innovations in AI, agricultural biotechnology, food, chemicals, nuclear energy, vaccines, and other disruptive innovations.

The authors speculate that HEX is an ancient survival mechanism. Mothers exposed to the chemical signal would be more likely to defend their babies against threats, while fathers who inhale it would likely be less aggressive.

Excited by the finding, Prof. Sobel thinks this is just the beginning of investigating olfaction as a driver of human aggression.

“The next stage is to do this with actual babies’ heads instead of HEX in a jar.”

This is an excerpt. Read the original post here. 

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

ChatGPT-Image-Mar-10-2026-01_39_01-PM
Viewpoint—“Miracle molecule” debunked: Why acemannan supplements don’t work
Wave Crest Over Red Cross
Viewpoint: Here are the election-inspired Trump administration healthcare policy reversals expected in the coming months
Aerial Sprayer Over Gradient Fields
Farming, food, and chemicals: Post-midterms, the MAHA alliance between Democrats and MAGA Republicans is bruised but not cowed. What comes next?
Microscopic IVF Egg Injection
With technical barriers to human embryo editing falling, ethical concerns escalate
Stacked Protest Signs on Concrete Ledge
Voters hate AI data centers, yet they are crucial to establishing a critical technology. So what’s next?
Picture1
Viewpoint: How badly is the U.S. food-safety net fraying? FDA’s bungled handling of the tainted lettuce crisis deepens concerns over cuts to disease tracking and response
Screenshot 2026-10-27 at 10.32
“Do your own research”: What Medicare’s annual open enrollment circus teaches us about the seductive trap of DIY health and science
Prescription Capsules Scattered on Twenty-Dollar Bills
Facts & Fallacies podcast: America's health care system is broken. A doctor explains how to fix it, Part 2
Bayer Crop Circle in Golden Wheat
Making fertilizer from thin air: Bayer’s gene-editing innovation could dramatically cut chemical fertilizer use in growing food
Screenshot-2026-10-21-at-11.30.51-AM
Viewpoint: Yes, our food system stinks, but the attack of ultra-processed foods is often misplaced
glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.