Kayt Sukel, contributor

In The Chemistry Between Us, neuroscientist Larry Young and journalist Brian Alexander examine the neurobiological roots of love

THERE is a reason most of us sigh into our drinks when Cole Porter croons, "What is this thing called love?" We understand his befuddlement all too well. (And let's face it: if a man about town like Porter couldn't figure out this whole love thing, what hope is there for the rest of us mere mortals?)

That's why it is encouraging to know that in the past two decades social neuroscientists have been diligently working to unravel the mysteries of love - including the phenomena of attraction, monogamy and the parent-child bond - using techniques such as brain imaging, genome-wide association studies and transgenic animal models. In The Chemistry Between Us, Larry Young, the director of Emory University's Center for Translational Social Neuroscience, and journalist Brian Alexander offer a novel take on many of those findings.

A few recent books, including my own, Dirty Minds, have chronicled love and sex-related efforts in neuroscience. One of the criticisms of many of these tomes is that they fail to take on the functional "why" questions - why monogamy exists at all, for example, or why some people are more prone to infidelity. In The Chemistry Between Us, Young and Alexander do not shy away from proposing some strong hypotheses about the ways our neurobiology shapes our behaviour when it comes to the "L" word.

Drawing on real stories as well as research, the authors take the reader on a fascinating journey through strip clubs, Romanian orphanages and labs where rodents are regularly stimulated with lubed paintbrushes. These myriad adventures provide a great context for the science - and cleverly illustrate all the ways in which love and sex can make changes to our brain chemistry.

While those who closely follow the latest neurobiological research concerning love and sex might not find many new studies in this mix, they will find a rather unique interpretation of how they all fit together.

Young, who is arguably one of most prolific researchers in the social neuroscience field, plants his flag firmly: he argues that love is truly an addiction and one to which none of us are immune. He takes a reductionist approach, focusing on molecules like dopamine, oxytocin and vasopressin, and examining how these chemicals exploit ancient neurobiological circuits.

Some may feel uncomfortable when Young and Alexander claim that sex tricks women into "babysitting" the men they love - nurturing them as they would their own infants, thanks to the goodly amounts of oxytocin released during the sex act by men hitting the cervix with their large penises and playing with their breasts. Sceptics probably won't feel much better when Young and Alexander postulate that vasopressin helps men see their female partners as simply extensions of their territory.

Still, the authors don't back down. "Many would like to believe that such notions are outdated stereotypes," they write. "They're not. We can fake it, but nature gets the last word." Not overly concerned with political correctness, Young and Alexander even go so far as to extend these hypotheses to touch on modern issues like marriage equality and single motherhood.

See original here:
What is this thing called love? Mere chemical trickery