Nature’s Gift profile

Nature’s Gift · PRODUCT EVIDENCE

Vitex (Chasteberry) Leaf and Berry

Botanical name not captured · Source checked Sep 6, 11:12 PM UTC

What the supplier lists

Captured product claims; report identity is shown separately below.

Product source ↗
Origin
Not captured
Plant part
Not captured
Extraction method
Not captured
Chemotype
Not captured
Read supplier product description

Anecdotal evidence indicates that the vitex tree’s various essential oils (available from both leaf and berry) may be extraordinarily helpful for women dealing with various menstrual and menopausal discomforts. However, this is an immensely powerful oil that needs careful and judicious use. Please read this information carefully and save a copy before purchasing and/or using the oil. Information from the distiller who used to provide our Vitex Berry Oil, Janina Sorenson, in Denmark: Vitex agnus castus is known to exert remarkable hormonal activity on especially the female hormonal system. It is believed to balance the two female gonadal hormones by having a progesterone-like activity. A commercial extract of the fruit is available commercially in Germany and has been repeatedly tested in clinical studies. Its action was found to increase the production of luteinising hormone, and hence be beneficial in the treatment of various diseases of the breasts and numerous menstrual abnormalities. I am told that Vitex agnus castus is highly advocated for diseases related to menstrual disorders, and that side effects have not been noted. (However, please read the safety warnings.) Many of the conditions named above are known likely consequences of progesterone deficiency, possibly stemming from the overabundance of estrogen like substances in the modern environment. Further information on Vitex, both leaf and berry oils, was presented at the Pacific Institute of Aromatherapy conference in November, 2000. A paper was presented by Barbara Chopin Lucks detailing her “Vitex Antholog,” anecdotal experiences of 23 women participating in a research project studying the use of Vitex oils in easing the various problems that occur during menopause. I highly recommend you invest in the proceedings of the convention, in order to read the whole report; it is available from the Pacific Institute. However, here is a brief summary of the experiences of the women who took part in the study, using the Berry Oil. First, Barbara learned that this is NOT an oil for men to use, or even be around…two men tried bottling it. One became nauseated, one developed a severe migraine.  However, the vast majority of women using either the leaf or the berry oil found that their menopausal symptoms were greatly lessened, and planned to continue using the oil after the three month study period ended. Of the women who were still menstruating, almost all reported regulation of cycles and less cramping and PMS. However several women who had stopped bleeding (some for extended periods) found their menses returning. Many users of the Berry oil found a great improvement in hot flashes/night sweats, and found themselves experiencing much less insomnia. One woman reports sharing the berry oil with her 11 year old daughter, and that hormonally induced headaches have been cleared away. Good results were experienced in the areas of vaginal thinning and dryness. My personal impression, after reading the

Size / optionSKUSupplier's listed priceAvailabilityProduct link
From price; choose size on supplier sitefa509ee7dd21822dbe5ee8ab7343147cUSD 19.00in stockBuy this option ↗
Prices retain their published currency. Shipping and tax may be additional.Confirm availability and batch with the supplier.

LEARN AS YOU COMPARE

What’s inside this oil?

Constituents are the natural chemicals that give an oil its character. See the main ones, learn what they do, and explore differences between batches.

I’m interested in

Meet the main constituents, then select one to see what makes it interesting.

Finding the matching oil reports…

Report links found on the supplier source

Follow the original source to inspect the complete report. Link discovery alone does not validate the report or current stock.

Notes on the captured information

Details to keep in mind when using this listing.

  • Product name is a browsing group; botanical identity must be verified before chemical comparison.

AUTOMATIC OIL REVIEW

More evidence needed for this report

What the evidence tells you

6 reports connected; 6 directly linked by the supplier. Read the evidence before comparing chemistry.

Supplier report information is available
Documented

6 source documents archived

The downloaded source document is preserved with its content fingerprint, so later changes do not overwrite the evidence. Archiving alone does not establish its report type or quantitative validity.

Documented

Report linked from the product page

The supplier connects this product to the report. Confirm the batch on the bottle before applying these figures to a purchase.

Evidence gap

Original analytical report status needs confirmation

These source documents are saved, but their status as original laboratory reports is unconfirmed or they are publisher summaries. They remain outside historical anomaly conclusions.

Evidence gap

Chemical extraction needs review

Automatically extracted figures are visible for inspection. They are excluded from historical anomaly conclusions until the extraction is reviewed.

Evidence gap

Comparison context is incomplete

Missing or unconfirmed: plant part, extraction method, origin, analysis method, batch, exact analysis date. Unknown values are not assumed to match known values.

Evidence gap

Numerical comparison is not supported for this report

The source describes the analysis as qualitative. Its listed figures remain visible, but are excluded from numerical historical anomaly conclusions.

Evidence gap

Source extraction has review notes

The source describes a qualitative GC/MS analysis; these figures are not validated mass fractions. The source includes reproduction restrictions; the archived original remains private. A source date requires review against the original document. Additional source extraction notes require review against the original document.

Evidence gap

Source extraction has review notes

Some source peak rows could not be fully verified or quantified. Additional source extraction notes require review against the original document.

Evidence gap

Numerical comparison is not supported for this report

The source describes the analysis as qualitative. Its listed figures remain visible, but are excluded from numerical historical anomaly conclusions.

Evidence gap

Source extraction has review notes

Some source peak rows could not be fully verified or quantified. The source describes a qualitative GC/MS analysis; these figures are not validated mass fractions. The source includes reproduction restrictions; the archived original remains private. Some source peaks overlap or combine constituents; independent percentages may not be available. A source date requires review against the original document. Additional source extraction notes require review against the original document.

Evidence gap

Numerical comparison is not supported for this report

The source describes the analysis as qualitative. Its listed figures remain visible, but are excluded from numerical historical anomaly conclusions.

Evidence gap

Source extraction has review notes

The source describes a qualitative GC/MS analysis; these figures are not validated mass fractions. The source includes reproduction restrictions; the archived original remains private. A source date requires review against the original document. Additional source extraction notes require review against the original document.

Evidence gap

Source extraction has review notes

Some source peak rows could not be fully verified or quantified. Additional source extraction notes require review against the original document.

Evidence gap

Source extraction has review notes

Some source peak rows could not be fully verified or quantified. Additional source extraction notes require review against the original document.

Evidence gap

Not enough comparable history to assess differences

A range requires at least three earlier, reviewed original reports with the same botanical, chemotype, origin, plant part, extraction, analysis method, percentage basis and storage context. Missing and trace values are never replaced with zero.

Read the reported chemistry

Keep the original report, its identity, and the historical sample size in view.

Supplier / batch
Nature’s Gift
Batch not reported
Report botanical identity
Vitex agnus-castus
Chemotype not reported
Origin / plant part
Origin not reported
Plant part not reported
Extraction / analysis
Extraction not reported
Method not reported · area percent
Source document archivedLinked from this productAnalysis: Date not reported
Read original source ↗
Chemical constituentThis reportMatched historical rangeWhat it means
1,8-Cineole16.25%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
SabineneCAS 3387-41-514.50%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
(E)-beta-Farnesene10.65%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
beta-Caryophyllene10.41%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
alpha-PineneCAS 80-56-89.43%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
LimoneneCAS 138-86-35.45%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
alpha-Terpinyl acetateCAS 80-26-23.16%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
BicyclogermacreneCAS 24703-35-33.04%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
Myrcene2.11%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
alpha-TerpineolCAS 98-55-52.06%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
delta-ElemeneCAS 20307-84-01.68%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
Terpinen-4-ol1.60%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
beta-PineneCAS 127-91-31.34%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
allo-AromadendreneCAS 25246-27-91.31%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
alpha-GurjuneneCAS 489-40-71.12%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
gamma-TerpineneCAS 99-85-41.11%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
beta-CedreneCAS 546-28-10.87%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
alpha-TerpineneCAS 99-86-50.71%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
para-Cymene0.64%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
alpha-ThujeneCAS 2867-05-20.59%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
cis-alpha-BergamoteneCAS 18252-46-50.56%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
alpha-Humulene0.55%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
LinaloolCAS 78-70-60.46%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
alpha-PhellandreneCAS 99-83-20.45%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
delta-Terpineol0.43%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
(E)-beta-Ocimene0.42%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
CarvacrolCAS 499-75-20.42%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
SpathulenolCAS 6750-60-30.40%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
Caryophyllene oxideCAS 1139-30-60.34%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
Terpinolene0.31%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
Germacrene DCAS 23986-74-50.29%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
Ledol0.28%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
AromadendreneCAS 489-39-40.27%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
T-Cadinol0.27%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
Citronellyl acetateCAS 150-84-50.23%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
trans-Sabinene hydrateCAS 7712-82-50.21%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
Viridiflorene0.21%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
beta-BisaboleneCAS 495-61-40.21%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
Ascaridole0.19%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
CarvoneCAS 99-49-00.18%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
2-epi-alpha-Funebrene0.18%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
Cembrene0.16%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
MaaliolCAS 527-90-20.13%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
Citronellol0.12%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
beta-Gurjunene0.12%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
beta-SesquiphellandreneCAS 20307-83-90.12%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
Nonanal0.11%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
NootkateneCAS 5090-61-90.11%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
beta-CadineneCAS 523-47-70.11%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
Palustrol0.11%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
CamphorCAS 76-22-20.09%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
Bornyl acetateCAS 76-49-30.09%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
alpha-GuaieneCAS 3691-12-10.09%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
cis-para-Menth-2-en-1-ol0.08%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
Methyl eugenol0.08%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
CampheneCAS 79-92-50.07%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
Linalyl acetateCAS 115-95-70.07%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
delta-Terpinyl acetate0.07%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
alpha-Acoradiene0.07%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
Sesquicineole0.07%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
Manool0.07%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
beta-BourboneneCAS 5208-59-30.06%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
beta-Guaiene0.06%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
Octan-3-yl acetate0.05%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
trans-para-Menth-2-en-1-ol0.05%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
gamma-GurjuneneCAS 22567-17-50.05%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
GlobulolCAS 489-41-80.05%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
Pseudolimonene0.04%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
trans-PinocarveolCAS 1674-08-40.04%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
3-Methylpentanol0.03%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
Isoamyl acetate0.03%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
NerolCAS 106-25-20.03%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
LongifoleneCAS 475-20-70.03%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
alpha-Muurolene0.03%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
Hexanal0.02%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
4-methyl-Pentanol0.02%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
Hashishene0.02%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
1-Octanol0.02%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
para-Cymenene0.02%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
trans-Piperitol0.02%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
Phellandral0.02%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
IsoledeneCAS 95910-36-40.02%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
alpha-CopaeneCAS 3856-25-50.02%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
(E)-Nerolidol0.02%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
alpha-BisabololCAS 515-69-50.02%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
Manool oxide0.02%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
Octane Alkane0.01%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
Thuja-2,4(10)-diene0.01%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
6-Methyl-5-hepten-2-one0.01%No comparable range0 matched historical reportsContext not comparable
89 measurements in this report · 89 shownObserved history is not a specification or a purity test.

Source changes

New listings, prices, and batch evidence.

  • Vitex (Chasteberry) Leaf and Berry

    Analytical document archived; extraction awaits review.

    View source ↗
  • Vitex (Chasteberry) Leaf and Berry

    Product first observed in the supplier catalog.

    View source ↗

Know what the evidence says

Three signals. No mystery scores.

Documented evidence

Source documents or comparable measurements support the specific finding shown.

Worth investigating

A chemistry difference or identity mismatch needs context. Open the report and matched history.

Evidence gap

A report, batch link, or key detail is missing. The oil's quality cannot be judged from missing information.