Nature’s Gift · PRODUCT EVIDENCE
Rosemary Camphor
Botanical name not captured · Source checked Sep 6, 11:50 PM UTC
What the supplier lists
Captured product claims; report identity is shown separately below.
Read supplier product description
If you are looking for the old-fashioned traditional high-in-camphor rosemary oil to use in decongestive or pain relief blends, this should be your choice. It is strongly camphorous in aroma, but for some uses, is the best choice. For example, Rosemary Camphor Oil has been proven to be a strong antispasmodic, so it would be useful in easing muscle cramps, rheumatism, poor circulation, and perhaps intestinal cramping. 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: March 2015 Batch No. SP-B800039 Batch No. SP-59047 Batch No. ES-59440 (Current Batch) BLENDS WITH: All of our Rosemary Essential Oils blend well with Basil, Bergamot, Black Pepper, Cedarwood, Citronella, Cypress, Eucalyptus, Ginger, Juniper, Hyssop, Lavender and Lavendin, Lemon, Marjoram, Mint, Origanum, Pine needle, Olibanum, Petitgrain, Sage, Tea Tree, and Vetiver. Rosmarinus officinalis var Camphor, organically produced, steam-distilled leaves and flowers, Spain. – decongestant – pain relief – strong antispasmodic useful for muscle cramps, rheumatism, poor circulation
| Size / option | SKU | Supplier's listed price | Availability | Product link |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| From price; choose size on supplier site | df3e417f66303885d0983007c8439bba | USD 13.00 | 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.
- March 2015Batch not specified on linkRead source ↗
- Batch No. SP-B800039Batch not specified on linkRead source ↗
- Batch No. SP-59047Batch not specified on linkRead source ↗
- Batch No. ES-59440 (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
3 reports connected; 3 directly linked by the supplier. Read the evidence before comparing chemistry.
3 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, extraction method, origin, analysis method, percentage basis, exact analysis date, batch. Unknown values are not assumed to match known values.
Source extraction has review notes
The percentage measurement basis requires confirmation. 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
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.
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
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. 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| alpha-pineneCAS 80-56-8 | 22.03% | No comparable range0 matched historical reports | Context not comparable |
| cineol-1.8 | 19.53% | No comparable range0 matched historical reports | Context not comparable |
| camphorCAS 76-22-2 | 18.42% | No comparable range0 matched historical reports | Context not comparable |
| campheneCAS 79-92-5 | 10.36% | No comparable range0 matched historical reports | Context not comparable |
| limoneneCAS 138-86-3 | 3.77% | No comparable range0 matched historical reports | Context not comparable |
| borneolCAS 507-70-0 | 3.32% | No comparable range0 matched historical reports | Context not comparable |
| myrcene | 3.07% | No comparable range0 matched historical reports | Context not comparable |
| beta-pineneCAS 127-91-3 | 2.75% | No comparable range0 matched historical reports | Context not comparable |
| beta-caryophyllene | 1.90% | No comparable range0 matched historical reports | Context not comparable |
| verbenoneCAS 18309-32-5 | 1.90% | No comparable range0 matched historical reports | Context not comparable |
| para-cymene | 1.85% | No comparable range0 matched historical reports | Context not comparable |
| alpha-terpineolCAS 98-55-5 | 1.59% | No comparable range0 matched historical reports | Context not comparable |
| bornyl acetateCAS 76-49-3 | 1.49% | No comparable range0 matched historical reports | Context not comparable |
| gamma-terpineneCAS 99-85-4 | 1.28% | No comparable range0 matched historical reports | Context not comparable |
Source changes
New listings, prices, and batch evidence.
- Rosemary Camphor
Analytical document archived for published batch 0016178; extraction awaits review.
View source ↗ - Rosemary Camphor
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.