Nature’s Gift · PRODUCT EVIDENCE
Ho Wood (Shui)
Botanical name not captured · Source checked Sep 7, 12:34 AM UTC
What the supplier lists
Captured product claims; report identity is shown separately below.
Read supplier product description
Shui, or Ho Wood as it is called in the US is the world’s greatest source of natural linalool. This specimen is 98.66% linalool, with traces of limonene, myrcene, gamma-terpinene, and other components. There are those who say it is aromatically a substitute for Rosewood. I’m not certain of that, although it is certainly reminiscent, and is, I am told, a renewable resource, avoiding the environmental damage that makes Rosewood a less than ideal choice. My source for this lovely oil says that the linalol content makes it a “potent anti-infective and immunostimulant agent. The essential oil’s composition means that it can be used externally for ear nose, and throat problems, for respiratory, digestive, and genitourinary infections.” Other sources agree that it is a powerful immune system stimulant as well as a powerful relaxant, wonderful for insomnia. Aromatically, we fell in love…soft woody, floral…gentle. A comforting aroma. SAFETY: Robert Tisserand says no need to limit dosage. Ho Wood may be a moderate skin irritant. SHELF LIFE: Approximately 2 to 3 years after you open the bottle. Storing in the dark, refrigerated, and decanting half full bottles into smaller, full bottles will extend shelf life. Certificate of Analysis: April 2015 Batch No: CH-0017339: C of A v2 Batch No. CH-136022 Batch No. CH-58895 Batch No. CH-59029 Batch No. CH-59146 Batch No. CN-59250 (current batch) Blends With: Bergamot, Basil, Cajeput, Cedarwood, Chamomiles, Geranium, Lavender, Sandalwood, Ylangylang. Cinnamomum camphora Sieb. var. linaloolifera Fujita, distilled from Organically grown wood and bark, rectified, China. Organically produced. • Aromatic substitute for Rosewood essential oil • Potent anti-infective and immunostimulant • Powerful relaxant, useful for insomnia
| Size / option | SKU | Supplier's listed price | Availability | Product link |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| From price; choose size on supplier site | 2064f754c714bb583676205ddeb3e509 | USD 15.00 | in stock | Buy this option ↗ |
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.
Meet the main constituents, then select one to see what makes it interesting.
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.
- April 2015Batch not specified on linkRead source ↗
- C of A v2Batch not specified on linkRead source ↗
- Batch No. CH-136022Batch not specified on linkRead source ↗
- Batch No. CH-58895Batch not specified on linkRead source ↗
- Batch No. CH-59029Batch not specified on linkRead source ↗
- Batch No. CH-59146Batch not specified on linkRead source ↗
- Batch No. CN-59250 (current batch)Batch not specified on linkRead source ↗
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
4 reports connected; 4 directly linked by the supplier. Read the evidence before comparing chemistry.
4 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.
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.
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.
Chemical extraction needs review
Automatically extracted figures are visible for inspection. They are excluded from historical anomaly conclusions until the extraction is reviewed.
Comparison context is incomplete
Missing or unconfirmed: plant part, origin, analysis method, exact analysis date, botanical name, extraction method, batch, percentage basis. Unknown values are not assumed to match known values.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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. Additional source extraction notes require review against the original document.
Source extraction has review notes
The percentage measurement basis requires confirmation. Additional source extraction notes require review against the original document.
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.
| Chemical constituent | This report | Matched historical range | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| LinaloolCAS 78-70-6 | 98.97% | No comparable range0 matched historical reports | Context not comparable |
| trans-Linalool oxide (5) (furanoid) | 0.40% | No comparable range0 matched historical reports | Context not comparable |
| cis-Linalool oxide (5) (furanoid) | 0.19% | No comparable range0 matched historical reports | Context not comparable |
| MyrceneCAS 123-35-3 | 0.08% | No comparable range0 matched historical reports | Context not comparable |
| LimoneneCAS 138-86-3 | 0.06% | No comparable range0 matched historical reports | Context not comparable |
| (E)-beta-OcimeneCAS 3779-61-1 | 0.05% | No comparable range0 matched historical reports | Context not comparable |
| 1,8-CineoleCAS 470-82-6 | 0.03% | No comparable range0 matched historical reports | Context not comparable |
| (Z)-3-Hexenyl butyrate | 0.03% | No comparable range0 matched historical reports | Context not comparable |
| (Z)-beta-OcimeneCAS 3338-55-4 | 0.02% | No comparable range0 matched historical reports | Context not comparable |
| CamphorCAS 76-22-2 | 0.02% | No comparable range0 matched historical reports | Context not comparable |
| para-CymeneCAS 99-87-6 | 0.01% | No comparable range0 matched historical reports | Context not comparable |
Source changes
New listings, prices, and batch evidence.
- Ho Wood (Shui)
Analytical document archived for published batch CH-59146; extraction awaits review.
View source ↗ - Ho Wood (Shui)
Product first observed in the supplier catalog.
View source ↗
Know what the evidence says
Three signals. No mystery scores.
Source documents or comparable measurements support the specific finding shown.
A chemistry difference or identity mismatch needs context. Open the report and matched history.
A report, batch link, or key detail is missing. The oil's quality cannot be judged from missing information.