Rose vs. Lavender for Olfactory Training: Why We Chose Lavender

What the original research used

The foundational olfactory training study by Hummel et al. (2009) at the University of Dresden Medical School established a four-scent protocol using rose, lemon, clove, and eucalyptus. Each scent was selected to represent a distinct primary odor category: floral (rose), fruity (lemon), aromatic (clove), and resinous (eucalyptus).

Since that original study, researchers conducting subsequent olfactory training trials have used variations on these four categories. Some studies have continued with rose. Others have substituted lavender for rose while keeping the same floral category represented. Both approaches appear in the peer-reviewed literature.

Why rose oil is a problem

Rose otto (the steam-distilled essential oil from Rosa damascena) is one of the most expensive essential oils produced. It takes roughly 10,000 pounds of rose petals to produce one pound of rose otto. Market prices for genuine, undiluted rose oil regularly exceed $5,000 per kilogram, and high-grade lots can cost significantly more.

That cost creates a supply chain problem. Rose oil is one of the most frequently adulterated essential oils in the global market. Common adulterants include synthetic geraniol (which mimics the dominant compound in rose oil), palmarosa oil (a much cheaper botanical source of geraniol), and various carrier oils used to dilute the concentration.

For olfactory training, oil purity matters. The Damm et al. (2014) multicenter study specifically examined odor concentration as a variable and found that higher-concentration odors were associated with greater improvement in olfactory test scores than low-concentration odors. A diluted or adulterated oil is, by definition, a lower-concentration oil.

Why we chose lavender

When we designed The Olfactory Training Kit, we had a choice: source rose oil and accept the risk that even "certified" suppliers might be providing adulterated product, or choose a well-documented floral alternative that we could verify with confidence.

We chose lavandin grosso (Lavandula x intermedia cv. Grosso), a French-grown hybrid lavender cultivar. Here's why:

Lavender represents the same floral odor category as rose in the Hummel protocol. Its primary odorant, linalool, is a floral compound that stimulates the same general class of olfactory receptors.

Lavender is widely used as a floral substitute in published olfactory training research. It is not an unusual or untested substitution.

Genuine lavender oil is available at a fraction of the cost of rose otto, which means the supply chain is cleaner. There is less economic incentive to adulterate lavender oil compared to rose oil.

We source our lavandin oil from suppliers who provide GC/MS (gas chromatography/mass spectrometry) testing to verify the chemical composition. GC/MS testing confirms the oil is Lavandula x intermedia cv. Grosso, identifies the linalool, linalyl acetate, and camphor concentrations, and rules out synthetic additives or carrier oil dilution.

Using lavender instead of rose allows us to keep the kit at $69 with free shipping, without compromising on oil purity.

What GC/MS testing shows

GC/MS testing breaks an essential oil down into its individual chemical components and measures the concentration of each one. For lavandin grosso, the key markers are:

Linalool, typically 24-35% in lavandin grosso. This is the primary floral odorant.

Linalyl acetate, typically 28-38%. Contributes to the characteristic lavender scent profile.

Note: The Olfactory Training Kit uses Lavandula x intermedia cv. Grosso (lavandin). Lavandula angustifolia is discussed here for comparison purposes only.

Camphor, typically 6-10% in lavandin grosso. Lavandin contains more camphor than Lavandula angustifolia (which typically has <1%). The camphor gives lavandin a sharper, more penetrating floral character. Both profiles are valid floral-category stimuli for olfactory training.

If a sample shows these compounds outside the ranges expected for its declared species, or shows synthetic compounds that shouldn't be there, the GC/MS report flags it. This is the same analytical method used across the pharmaceutical and fragrance industries to verify essential oil identity and purity.

Does it matter which floral scent you use?

The published research has not directly compared rose-based training against lavender-based training in a head-to-head study. What the research has established is that the four-category protocol (floral, fruity, aromatic, resinous) is the structure that matters. The specific botanical within each category may be less important than ensuring the oil is pure, concentrated, and consistently available across the full training period.

Several research groups have used lavender as the floral representative in their olfactory training protocols without noting it as a limitation or deviation from the standard approach.

Our position

We could have used rose oil. We chose not to, because we were not confident we could consistently source genuine, undiluted rose otto at a price point that keeps this kit accessible. We were not willing to put an oil in the kit that we couldn't verify was pure.

Lavender gives us a floral-category essential oil with strong GC/MS verifiability, clean supply chain economics, and documented use in the published olfactory training literature. We think that's the right tradeoff.

The content on this page is for informational and educational purposes only. It is not medical advice and does not replace evaluation or advice from a qualified healthcare provider.