Experts Call for Smell Education in Schools to Boost Well-Being

A historian of olfaction argues that teaching children to engage their sense of smell could improve wellness, sharpen perception, and counter effects of synthetic scents.

By Duabbly Staff

The human sense of smell deserves far greater attention in formal education, according to a leading academic who studies the cultural and historical dimensions of odor. Dr. Will Tullett of the University of York contends that introducing olfactory training into school curricula could yield substantial benefits for young people's development and overall quality of life.

Tullett's argument rests on a troubling observation about modern life: the widespread replacement of natural scents with artificial alternatives. Products ranging from margarine to automobile interiors, along with our homes themselves, have increasingly been stripped of their original aromas and replaced with manufactured substitutes. This shift raises a fundamental question about what happens to human smell discrimination when synthetic fragrances saturate daily experience.

Environmental factors compound the problem. Pollution has been documented to weaken people's olfactory abilities, meaning that many individuals today operate with diminished capacity to perceive and differentiate between scents. Tullett sees this as a dual crisis: people encounter fewer authentic smells while simultaneously losing the ability to distinguish among them effectively.

The solution, in Tullett's view, lies in deliberate training and cultural reorientation. He advocates for making olfactory education a standard component of primary and secondary schooling, though he acknowledges that similar training could occur at home with parental guidance. The approach mirrors techniques used by wine professionals, who systematically expose themselves to diverse aromas to build a mental library of scent reference points.

"The more we smell, the more we enlarge the vocabulary through which we can describe other things," Tullett explained, drawing parallels to how sommeliers approach their craft. By walking through markets and deliberately engaging their noses with various items, wine experts expand their sensory toolkit. This same methodology could help children develop enhanced capacity to recognize, distinguish, and articulate olfactory experiences.

Beyond vocabulary building, smell education addresses practical life skills. Understanding how to assess food freshness through scent represents a concrete application that supersedes reliance on commercial use-by dates. Tullett points to food safety and sustainability as domains where trained smell perception delivers genuine utility. Families could reduce waste by developing confidence in their ability to judge whether perishable items remain edible based on aroma rather than arbitrary expiration guidelines.

The wellness implications deserve particular emphasis. Numerous studies establish robust connections between olfactory enjoyment and psychological wellbeing. Conversely, individuals experiencing smell loss frequently report depression, anxiety, and related mental health symptoms. By strengthening children's engagement with scents early, educational interventions might establish protective factors against future olfactory decline and associated psychological consequences.

Yet Tullett resists the narrative that modern people fundamentally undervalue smell. When prompted, most individuals readily share vivid memories tethered to particular aromas, demonstrating that scent resonates powerfully in human consciousness. The real deficit lies not in caring about smell but in lacking adequate language, confidence, and social permission to discuss olfactory experiences openly.

His forthcoming book "Sniff: A History of Smells," scheduled for September publication, challenges another widespread misconception: that the past was inherently smellier than the present. Tullett argues that historical periods contained different scents rather than worse ones. This distinction matters considerably because it reveals how smell functions as a social marker. Rather than representing objective reality, odor judgments reflect cultural values and become tools for establishing hierarchies and boundaries.

Smell-based discrimination persists in contemporary society in troubling ways. Landlords have reportedly refused housing to people of particular ethnic backgrounds based on assumptions about cooking aromas. Recent legislative proposals in Parliament threatened to criminalize rough sleepers for producing "excessive" odors. These examples illustrate how olfactory prejudice operates in material ways, affecting people's access to shelter and fundamental dignity.

Tullett emphasizes the importance of interrogating the origins of smell preferences and recognizing how cultural conditioning shapes olfactory responses. The scents we find pleasant or objectionable emerge from learned associations rather than biological absolutes. Developing this awareness could foster greater self-understanding while simultaneously cultivating empathy across olfactory differences.

"Rather than instinctively using smell to build divides, a thoughtful sniff can help us get to know ourselves and others better," Tullett suggested. This framework positions olfactory literacy as a tool for social cohesion rather than division.

The aromas characteristic of any era tell stories about that moment in history. Early twenty-first century Britain, Tullett observes, carries the distinct scents of hand sanitizer, wildfires, and water pollution. Where wood smoke once evoked nostalgia and comfort, the smell of burning vegetation increasingly signals danger and climate disruption. This olfactory shift mirrors larger transformations in contemporary experience and points toward a future where our relationship with scent reflects an altered world.