But he adds that, rather than the CQ idea taking over the world, “we hear about large clumps of people using the website in North American universities – Minnesota and the like.”One useful message from the programme, however, might change everything for would-be Casanovas. According to the Chicago neurologist Dr Alan Hirsch, wafts of aftershave actually inhibit female sexual arousal. “During experiments, we found that odours thrown in as controls, such as cucumber and liquorice, were more arousing than cologne or perfume,” Hirsch says. “The presence of aftershave actually suppressed the blood flow to the vagina.”Choose a mateMEN PREFER A WOMAN…who has a feminine face, with arched eyebrows and eyes set wide apart, with a curvy figure and with large breasts (a 32C or 32D bra size, compared to the UK average of 36B) and, especially, with a high waist-to-hips ratio (a 23in waist and 36in hips is ideal). She should be smaller and younger than they are, and should make the man feel good by focusing on boosting his self-esteem in their early meetings.WOMEN PREFER A MAN…who has a strong brow and jaw-line; who is tall; who has a good sense of humour; who looks as though he is affluent and has a high-status job.AND HOW WE SHOULD CHOOSE A MATE…We should select someone who is compatible; who is well-matched sexually; who sees eye-to-eye with us about money; who has similar feelings about families and about having children; who has similar feelings about who does what around the house; who has similar attitudes to smoking, drinking and other personal habits; and whose genetic background and facial appearance are similar to our own. Ideally, the man should be both older and taller than the woman – this is one of the few evolutionary theories that still hold true, according to psychologists.’Secrets of the Sexes’, 9pm, Sunday 24 July, BBC1. The makers of Red Bull have insisted the energy drink is “perfectly safe” after one of Scotland’s biggest off-licence chains banned youngsters from buying it.

The One o One chain has refused to sell the drink to under-16s due to its high caffeine content. The chain – which has stores across Glasgow and Paisley – has told staff to use their discretion to ask customers buying Red Bull for proof of ID. Advertised with “Red Bull gives you wings”, each can has 80mg of caffeine – the same amount as a cup of coffee.
A spokeswoman for the firm said the drink did not pose a risk. She said: “Red Bull is perfectly safe to drink and there is no medical evidence to suggest otherwise.

There is no legal age restriction but it is generally considered that products containing caffeine are not suitable for young children, as they do not need an extra boost of energy.”The Austrian-made drink has been banned in Denmark and the EU’s highest court gave France permission to ban it in 2004. Health departments in Ireland, Turkey, Sweden and the US have also expressed concern.. They have names like Snooper and Road Angel and, according to the manufacturers, can tell you about police speed-traps long before you arrive at them. This type of radar detector has seemingly become a dashboard necessity in the motorist’s battle to keep one step ahead of the road-side technology deployed by the police. But now the Government has decided to follow the lead of other European countries and outlaw the use of some devices So it’s important to know just what you can and cannot use. The Road Safety Bill, expected to become law in April, will ban gadgets that can detect whether a police camera or speed gun is in use. Crucially, though, the legislation won’t stop drivers using devices using GPS technology or other databasestthat identify the position of a speed trap or a mobile police camera unit
This information is already available through a number of organisations.

For the law-abiding motorist this means that he or she will still be able to fit a device to a vehicle that will tell where a camera is located, but won’t be able to operate technology that tells them which ones are non-functioning.Andrew Howard, the head of road safety at the AA Motoring Trust, says this is a sensible compromise that will stop drivers speeding with impunity in areas that are policed by the ubiquitous yellow boxes. He says: “We have always been concerned about radar detectors because it means someone can drive around a housing estate at 30 mph when they know the cameras are working and then race off at 50 mph when they discover they are switched off.”This is a view shared by the Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety. Its executive director, Robert Gifford, says: “Competent drivers should not need a camera detector. They should be thinking all the time about the driving task, not allowing themselves to be distracted by technology that is of limited benefit and soon to become illegal.”But the proposed ban on radar detectors is not good news for the thousands of motorists who have each paid hundreds of pounds for the state-of-the-art equipment. The Government has no plans to compensate them for the estimated millions of pounds that they will have spent. Even so, the legislation won’t come into force until 2006, and so recent purchasers will still get at least a year’s worth of use out of their detectors.There are also scientific advances that may soon make radar detection technology obsolete. A new police device being tested in America doesn’t emit any energy and therefore is “invisible” to the conventional detectors.