Safety Profile
Known Safety Concerns
- High-dose GI upset and diarrhea
- Oxalate content -- caution in kidney stone history
- Naturally high vitamin C -- monitor total intake
Contraindications
- High-dose GI upset and diarrhea
- Oxalate content -- caution in kidney stone history
Interactions
Information not yet available for this ingredient profile.
Evidence and Scientific Findings
Ingredient Overview
Acerola is exceptionally rich in natural ascorbic acid (vitamin C). At supplemental doses, generally safe. High doses may cause gastrointestinal upset and osmotic diarrhea consistent with excess vitamin C. Oxalic acid content may contribute to kidney stone risk in susceptible individuals.
Biological and Chemical Classification
- Scientific Name
- Malpighia emarginata
Mechanism of Action
Information not yet available for this ingredient profile.
Clinical Evidence of Effectiveness
Information not yet available for this ingredient profile.
Pharmacokinetics
Information not yet available for this ingredient profile.
Recommended Dosage
Information not yet available for this ingredient profile.
SETI — Scientific Evidence Transparency Index
Executive Summary — Ingredient Assessment
- 10 studies reviewed
- 0 high-quality studies (meta-analysis or RCT)
- Main clinical benefit observed: Botanical
- Evidence consistency: High consistency across studies (100%)
- High-dose GI upset and diarrhea
- Oxalate content -- caution in kidney stone history
- Naturally high vitamin C -- monitor total intake
The available scientific evidence for Acerola Cherry indicates notable safety signals that warrant caution. Use should be considered carefully and monitored, particularly in sensitive populations or alongside other medications.
Total SETI Score
High risk| Evidence quality | 10/40 |
| Evidence consistency | 20/20 |
| Safety signals | 0/20 |
| Study recency | 10/10 |
| Evidence transparency | 10/10 |
Evidence Summary
- 10 studies reviewed
- 0 high-quality studies (meta-analysis or systematic review)
- 0 studies identified benefits or no safety concern (GREEN)
- 10 studies reported limited or advisory safety evidence (YELLOW)
Evidence Policy
Only peer-reviewed scientific literature indexed in PubMed or comparable databases is included in this evaluation. Commercial websites, blogs, and marketing materials are excluded. All references include direct traceable links to source documents.
Last updated: 25 მარ 2026, 22:28
Evidence Distribution
-
Observational / other LOW evidence YELLOWMathematical Modeling and Physicochemical Characterization of Foam-Mat Drying of Acerola (Malpighia emarginata) Pulp. ↗Manu00e7ano LF et al.. Mathematical Modeling and Physicochemical Characterization of Foam-Mat Drying of Acerola (Malpighia emarginata) Pulp.. Foods. 2026. PMID:41683080.PMID 41683080 ↗Journal FoodsYear 2026Study type Observational / otherEvidence strength LOW evidencePubMed link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41683080/
-
Observational / other LOW evidence YELLOWOptimization of spray-drying conditions for green acerola concentrate juice: effect of temperature and maltodextrin. ↗Costa FS et al.. Optimization of spray-drying conditions for green acerola concentrate juice: effect of temperature and maltodextrin.. J Sci Food Agric. 2026. PMID:41312762.PMID 41312762 ↗Journal J Sci Food AgricYear 2026Study type Observational / otherEvidence strength LOW evidencePubMed link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41312762/
-
Observational / other LOW evidence YELLOWFruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) and their parasitoids associated with a commercial acerola orchards in Parnau00edba River Valley, Brazil. ↗Rocha LLGO et al.. Fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) and their parasitoids associated with a commercial acerola orchards in Parnau00edba River Valley, Brazil.. Neotrop Entomol. 2025. PMID:41329301.PMID 41329301 ↗Journal Neotrop EntomolYear 2025Study type Observational / otherEvidence strength LOW evidencePubMed link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41329301/
-
Observational / other LOW evidence YELLOWDetection of adulteration in acerola (Malpighia emarginata DC.) pulps using a portable near-infrared (nir) spectrophotometer and chemometric. ↗Dutra JWA et al.. Detection of adulteration in acerola (Malpighia emarginata DC.) pulps using a portable near-infrared (nir) spectrophotometer and chemometric.. Food Res Int. 2025. PMID:41174408.PMID 41174408 ↗Journal Food Res IntYear 2025Study type Observational / otherEvidence strength LOW evidencePubMed link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41174408/
-
Observational / other LOW evidence YELLOWSalicylic Acid Reduces Salinity Stress in Barbados Cherry Irrigated with Oilfield Water in Semiarid Brazil. ↗Gomes Nobre R et al.. Salicylic Acid Reduces Salinity Stress in Barbados Cherry Irrigated with Oilfield Water in Semiarid Brazil.. ACS Omega. 2025. PMID:41114186.PMID 41114186 ↗Journal ACS OmegaYear 2025Study type Observational / otherEvidence strength LOW evidencePubMed link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41114186/
-
Observational / other LOW evidence YELLOWAdsorption and nanoencapsulation: Innovative strategies for recovery and protection of flavonoids from Malpighia emarginata DC. (acerola) pomace extract. ↗Freitas EES et al.. Adsorption and nanoencapsulation: Innovative strategies for recovery and protection of flavonoids from Malpighia emarginata DC. (acerola) pomace extract.. Food Chem. 2025. PMID:40554273.PMID 40554273 ↗Journal Food ChemYear 2025Study type Observational / otherEvidence strength LOW evidencePubMed link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40554273/
-
Observational / other LOW evidence YELLOWEfficiency of Ozonated Water Treatment with a Microbubble System for Sanitization and Preservation of Postharvest Quality of Acerolas. ↗Gonu00e7alves-Magalhu00e3es C et al.. Efficiency of Ozonated Water Treatment with a Microbubble System for Sanitization and Preservation of Postharvest Quality of Acerolas.. Foods. 2025. PMID:40428593.PMID 40428593 ↗Journal FoodsYear 2025Study type Observational / otherEvidence strength LOW evidencePubMed link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40428593/
-
Observational / other LOW evidence YELLOWMultiple targets directed screening of compounds from northeastern Brazilian fruits with activity in oxidative stress pathways associated with vascular damage throughout ageing. ↗Menezes GMS et al.. Multiple targets directed screening of compounds from northeastern Brazilian fruits with activity in oxidative stress pathways associated with vascular damage throughout ageing.. Nat Prod Res. 2025. PMID:40337800.PMID 40337800 ↗Journal Nat Prod ResYear 2025Study type Observational / otherEvidence strength LOW evidencePubMed link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40337800/
-
Observational / other LOW evidence YELLOWEfficiency of pantraps for monitoring bees diversity in Brazilian acerola orchards: the role of color diversity. ↗Coelho MS et al.. Efficiency of pantraps for monitoring bees diversity in Brazilian acerola orchards: the role of color diversity.. An Acad Bras Cienc. 2025. PMID:40136199.PMID 40136199 ↗Journal An Acad Bras CiencYear 2025Study type Observational / otherEvidence strength LOW evidencePubMed link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40136199/
-
Observational / other LOW evidence YELLOWAcerola-Derived Photorepair System for Eliminating Ultraviolet-Induced Pyrimidine Dimers in Human Cells. ↗Yanagimachi M et al.. Acerola-Derived Photorepair System for Eliminating Ultraviolet-Induced Pyrimidine Dimers in Human Cells.. Nutrients. 2025. PMID:40077662.PMID 40077662 ↗Journal NutrientsYear 2025Study type Observational / otherEvidence strength LOW evidencePubMed link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40077662/
Score Transparency
0 of 10 approved references (score saturates at 10). More peer-reviewed studies = stronger evidence base.
Method: Q = number of approved references ÷ 10 (capped at 1.0)
Limited — mostly case reports or animal studies
Method: L = mean study-level weight across approved references. Level 1 (meta-analysis / systematic review) = 1.0; Level 2 (RCT) = 0.8; Level 3 (cohort/case-control) = 0.6; Level 4 (case report) = 0.4; Level 5 (animal / in-vitro) = 0.2.
Mixed or neutral — roughly equal benefit and risk signals
Method: D = (sum of risk-scored references − sum of benefit-scored references) ÷ total evidence score, then scaled from [−1, 1] to [0, 1]. 0.0 = pure benefit; 0.5 = neutral; 1.0 = pure risk.
One or more monitoring-level safety signals active
Method: S = 0.5 (neutral baseline) + sum of active signal severity deltas ÷ 10. Severity deltas: Critical = +2.0, High = +1.5, Moderate = +1.0, Low = +0.5. Capped at 1.0.
Final GIRI Score for Acerola Cherry. Risk level thresholds: Low 0–3.0 · Moderate 3.0–5.5 · High 5.5–7.5 · Critical 7.5–10.
Full methodology & data sources
The GIRI Score is computed entirely from structured data — no editorial scoring or subjective weighting is applied at any step.
- References: Only approved references are counted. Each reference is assigned an evidence level (L1–L5) and a direction (risk / neutral / benefit) by the reference manager or AI classifier.
- Safety Signals: Sourced from regulatory agencies (FDA, EMA, Health Canada, TGA, and others) and pharmacovigilance databases. Only active signals count toward the score.
- Formula version: GIRI Score v3.7.0 — Q × L × D × S × 10.
- Limitations: The score reflects published evidence and recorded signals as of the last update date. It is not a clinical risk assessment and should not replace advice from a qualified healthcare professional.
Risk Level Classification
Based on available regulatory signals and scientific evidence, this ingredient presents a low safety concern under normal conditions of use.
0–3.0
3.0–5.5
5.5–7.5
7.5–10
The score pin shows exactly where this ingredient falls on the fixed risk scale.
What drove the Low classification for Acerola Cherry
A score of 1.5 places this ingredient in the Low band. Thresholds: Low 0–3.0 · Moderate 3.0–5.5 · High 5.5–7.5 · Critical 7.5–10.
0 approved references.
Limited — mostly case reports or animal studies (Level 4–5).
Neutral or mixed — benefit and risk signals roughly balanced.
No active signals — S component is at neutral baseline (0.5), contributing no extra risk weight.
No major regulatory restrictions or advisories recorded across monitored jurisdictions (FDA, EMA, Health Canada, TGA, and others).
How are the Low / Moderate / High / Critical thresholds defined?
The four risk levels are fixed score bands. A score is assigned to exactly one level based on where it falls:
| Level | Score | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| LOW | 0.0 – 2.9 | Sparse or predominantly beneficial evidence. No active safety alerts. |
| MODERATE | 3.0 – 5.4 | Mixed signals — some risk alongside benefit. Caution at high doses or in sensitive groups. |
| HIGH | 5.5 – 7.4 | Multiple studies or regulatory alerts documenting adverse effects. Professional oversight recommended. |
| CRITICAL | 7.5 – 10 | Regulatory restrictions in one or more major jurisdictions. Serious documented harm. Avoid without specialist supervision. |
Thresholds are fixed constants (GIRI_Score_Utils::LEVEL_THRESHOLDS). They do not change per ingredient and are never subject to editorial adjustment.