Recently, many bloggers have written a lot about essential oils, comparing companies or explaining how they use them, writing ebooks or creating groups for discussion and learning.

In all of the reading I have come across in the blogosphere, there seems to be some confusion, or at the very least, a great deal of misinformation, and at times, a severe lack of understanding of what oils are, how they work and what our expectations of them should be.  To that end, I have started my Quantum Physics and Essential Oils series, to give some of the science behind essential oils.  

Not everyone is science minded though and that’s ok. Still there are some questions folks should be asking first.

I think there is a fundamental flaw in the late treatment of the essential oils question, when folks are focused on “who has the best eo’s” without understanding HOW eo’s work and WHY. Purity, potency, and the rest doesn’t matter if folks don’t know how to really use them, or their understanding and perception is filled with misinformation and ignorance.

It’s like saying, “If I just drink raw milk, I will resolve X, Y, and Z issues.” Well maybe. But how much raw milk you drink may be as much of a factor as where the milk comes from, how it was collected, whether the cows were A2 or A1 positive, and also all of the other factors of your diet and lifestyle. If you drink the best raw milk, but keep eating loads if sugar, it will undermine the benefits. And if you drink a teaspoon a day vs a quart a day, you may not have any results at all.

And perhaps someone has the mind set that all milk is the same, regardless of pasteurization status, and therefore has equal benefits or detriments.

There are differing schools of thought about how essential oils should be used therapeutically. There is the British model and teh French school of thought. Most of the US Aromatherapists are taught according to the British view, which is very conservative and views EO’s as basically highly powerful and even dangerous substances that should be treated with the same caution as Pharmaceuticals.

The French school of thought is that EO’s are natural substances, and while highly potent and powerful, they are not inherently DANGEROUS, and not subject to the same caution and rules as synthetic pharmaceuticals.

The Brits would NEVER apply an oil neat to the skin, and ingestion is highly inadvisable. The French maintain that a properly distilled, pure and potent oil can be applied directly to the skin, or even ingested safely, in large quantities.

I subscribe to the French way of thinking. What I have learned is that historically, back when oils, herbs and aromatics were part of people’s daily lives, essential oils were sometimes used in great quantities, depending on the circumstances.  Today, folks who experience incredible results and even miraculous healings, are using a LOT more oil than the British model would suggest.  The scientists and researchers who are looking into essential oils for healing cancer are not diluting, or using small amounts, or limiting to topical application: they are having folks ingest large quantities, and also taking into account lifestyle, diet, etc.

Without knowing how and why an oil does what it does, it’s effect on the body, how much to use in what applications, all of the question of “which oil is best” is really moot. There’s a lot more to it than whether an oil is “quality” or not. If you don’t know what you are doing with the oils, or why, then you may not be getting the best results, even from the “best” oil.

And if one doesn’t understand the oils, how can one expect to know what one is looking for in examining the various companies?