CHAMGAP
APPROVEDReviewed and approved by the Chamgap Editorial Team (2026-08-02). The draft was written by AI, the existence of all 2 cited sources was verified at the original page, and the verdict passed blind grading and adversarial audit. Methodology v0.6.
Verdict No. 1985 · Search date 2026-08-02 · Methodology v0.6

Whole date fruit, 100 g,
does it really help with Reduced bleeding during 24 hours after vaginal delivery?

30-Second Summary
C
Evidence Grade C · 48 · Safety acceptable
A prospectively registered trial found a lower bleeding score after dates, but one small unblinded study is not definitive
A 100 g serving of whole dates is generally safe as food but contains substantial sugar. Postpartum hemorrhage is an emergency; dates must not replace monitoring, uterotonics, or clinical evaluation.
What the
research shows
The verdict is C with 48 points. In a 98-person randomized trial after vaginal delivery, women given 100 g of whole dates two hours postpartum had lower 24-hour bleeding scores. Prospective registration, a matching primary outcome, and a between-group confidence interval are uncommon strengths in this batch, but it remains one small unblinded study.
What the
ads claim
Familiar claims about jujube for women can blur distinct species. The tested food was whole Phoenix dactylifera date fruit, not Korean jujube, and it cannot replace hospital postpartum observation or standard treatment.
*

Useful facts when choosing a product

  • The intervention was 100 g of whole Mazafati Bam Phoenix dactylifera fruit taken once, two hours after delivery.
  • Date palm fruit and Korean jujube, Ziziphus jujuba, are different species. Verdict 293 is ? and concerns wild-jujube seed, another different material.
  • A PBLAC score of 100 was originally a screening threshold for menstrual blood loss above 80 mL. It is not a linear conversion from score to milliliters and was not validated as a severity threshold for postpartum bleeding.
  • Menstrual screening validity cannot simply be transferred to postpartum lochia and pad use; the paper also acknowledges the limitation of self-reported measurement.
Gap Measurement · Verdict 1985 · C 48
What advertising claims
What independent, higher-quality research supports
△ GAP
01

What the research actually shows

Niknami and colleagues compared 100 g of whole Mazafati Bam dates two hours after delivery with no-date control. They used sequentially numbered opaque envelopes, modified intention-to-treat analysis, and an exact nonparametric confidence interval. The Research and Technology Vice-Chancellor of Guilan University of Medical Sciences funded the study; there was no grower or seller funding and the authors declared no competing interests.

02

Why this is classified as C (48)

The trial measured clinically important postpartum bleeding with a prospectively registered matching primary outcome, but the converted effect was below the conventional medium threshold. One small unblinded trial using an indirect score of uncertain postpartum validity yields C with 48 points.

Counterpoint. This was the only trial in the batch to report a between-group confidence interval and it also had public funding, allocation concealment, and modified intention-to-treat analysis.

Rejudgment record. Cross-check applied — Verified analyzed sample, between-group estimate, confidence interval, and effect size in the article and cross-checked prospective IRCT registration, primary-outcome agreement, and public funding

Scoring profile behind this grade
EndpointHHard endpoint - actual events such as death
ReplicationR1Single confirmatory trial
IndependenceI2Decisive evidence is publicly or non-profit funded
Effect sizeE~Statistically positive but below the threshold

The scoring table and the verdict agree (C).

Sub-claim grades by effect

This ingredient is marketed for several effects. A single overall grade blends strong and weak claims together, so each effect is graded separately here. The overall grade reflects the strongest disconfirming or core claim.

Effect (sub-claim)GradeBasis
One hundred grams of whole date fruit reduces 24-hour postpartum bleedingCOne prospectively registered trial was positive, but it was unblinded, indirect, and unreplicated.

Cross-check — Codex and Claude

This verdict was drafted by Codex through literature review and source-existence checks, cross-checked through blind grading and adversarial audit, and settled by reapplying the methodology boundary rules. Cases with split grades were resolved through rejudgment.
03

Evidence Table

StudyDesignSampleFundingEndpointResultWeight
Study 1Unblinded randomized controlled trial with prospective registration45Research and Technology Vice-Chancellor of Guilan University of Medical SciencesPrimary 24-hour postpartum PBLAC bleeding scoreMedians 35.0 versus 39.0; Hodges–Lehmann 9.0 points lower, 95% CI 2.0 to 18.0, P=0.009Prospective registration, matching primary outcome, between-group CI, and public funding are strengths; one small unblinded indirect assessment
§

Receipt — 2 References

All 2 cited sources were verified for existence at the original page (as of 2026-08-02).

Niknami M, Farash M, Rahnavardi M, Maroufizadeh S, Faraji Darkhaneh R. The effect of date fruit consumption on early postpartum hemorrhage: a randomized clinical trial. BMC Womens Health. 2023;23:441. DOI: 10.1186/s12905-023-02604-9.
checked
Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials. IRCT20210607051505N2.
checked
Draft and rewrite: Codex (AI) · Verification: Codex blind grading and adversarial audit · Final adjudication: Claude
Reviewed and approved: Chamgap Editorial Team · Approval date: 2026-08-02 · Corrections: none

Cite this verdict

Whole date fruit, 100 g x 24-hour postpartum bleeding Evidence Grade C card
[Chamgap] Whole date fruit, 100 g x 24-hour postpartum bleeding — Evidence Grade C·48. 2 cited sources checked. Source: https://chamgap.com/en/verdicts/womens/whole-date-fruit-100g-postpartum-24h-bleeding/ · CC BY 4.0

CC BY 4.0 — free to use with attribution; do not distort grades, numbers, or verdict meaning.

!

What this document does and does not do

Chamgap is an information source. It reports what research has and has not confirmed; it does not tell readers what to take or buy. That decision belongs to readers and, when needed, medical or legal professionals. This verdict reflects literature available up to the search date and may change as new research appears. Nothing here is medical advice.