Don’t take our word for it. Here’s every fact on this site, with its evidence grade, its caveats, and a link to the source, so you can check us.
We start you on the strong ones: findings that have been replicated or come from one large, well-controlled study. Moderate and weak facts are here too, labeled for what they are. Use “Link to this fact” to share a single card.
The industry / Animal study
This lavender study was funded by a university with no declared industry involvement, unlike much of the evidence used to argue these oils are safe for children, which comes from the essential-oil trade or from a manufacturer of lavender's main constituents.
Moderate evidence.
Caveats
Funding source is not evidence quality: this study is small (n = 5 per group) and the industry studies it contrasts with are larger and guideline-compliant, though narrower in scope.
Source: Kim & Lim 2022, Journal of Korean Medical Science Link to this fact
The industry / Other evidence
EFSA's panel re-analyzed the Southampton data with its own model and concluded the trial gave only limited evidence of a small effect in some children and was no basis for changing the acceptable daily intake of the colors or sodium benzoate.
Moderate evidence: EFSA is the regulator reviewing a study its UK counterpart funded; its re-analysis used recalculated unnormalized scores and was not a new trial.
Source: McCann 2007 / EFSA 2008, The Lancet Link to this fact
Information, not medical advice. See also: myths we won’t tell you.