ორშაბათი, აპრილი 13, 2026
- Advertisement -
Google search engine
Global Ingredient Risk Index Botanical

Bladderwrack

Fucus vesiculosus

Also known as: Bladderwrack seaweed, Fucus vesiculosus extract, Bladder wrack, Rockweed, Fucus algae

MODERATE RISK 4.0/10 How?

This ingredient is classified as unclassified risk (GIRI score: 4.0/10).

02

Safety Profile

Information not yet available for this ingredient profile.

═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════ -->
03

Interactions

Information not yet available for this ingredient profile.

═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════ -->
04

Evidence and Scientific Findings

Overview

Ingredient Overview

Bladderwrack (Fucus vesiculosus) is a brown seaweed containing fucoidan, iodine, and alginic acid. High iodine content is the primary safety concern — can trigger or worsen both hypo- and hyperthyroidism; individuals with thyroid conditions must use under medical supervision. Heavy metal contamination (arsenic, mercury, lead) is a significant quality risk; use only third-party tested products. May have anticoagulant properties (fucoidan) — avoid with warfarin. Contraindicated in pregnancy and thyroid disorders without medical advice.

Classification

Biological and Chemical Classification

Scientific Name
Fucus vesiculosus
Mechanism

Mechanism of Action

Information not yet available for this ingredient profile.

Clinical Evidence

Clinical Evidence of Effectiveness

Information not yet available for this ingredient profile.

Pharmacokinetics

Pharmacokinetics

Information not yet available for this ingredient profile.

Dosage

Recommended Dosage

Information not yet available for this ingredient profile.

═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════ -->
05

SETI — Scientific Evidence Transparency Index

SETI Score 50/100
Risk Level High risk
Scientific Confidence Low
Evidence Strength Limited
Key Benefit Botanical
Evidence Reviewed 10 PubMed studies
Scientific Confidence Low
Based on study quality, consistency, and recency

Executive Summary — Ingredient Assessment

SETI Score 50/100
Risk Level High risk
Evidence Strength Limited
Main Benefit Botanical
Ingredient Bladderwrack
Scientific name Fucus vesiculosus
Scientific Evidence Overview
  • 10 studies reviewed
  • 0 high-quality studies (meta-analysis or RCT)
  • Main clinical benefit observed: Botanical
  • Evidence consistency: High consistency across studies (100%)
Safety Signals
  • No significant safety signals identified in the reviewed literature.
Evidence Strength Limited
Final Scientific Assessment

The available scientific evidence for Bladderwrack indicates notable safety signals that warrant caution. Use should be considered carefully and monitored, particularly in sensitive populations or alongside other medications.

Ingredient Bladderwrack
Evidence reviewed 10 peer-reviewed studies (last 10 years)
Scientific name Fucus vesiculosus
50 /100

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: 06 აპრ 2026, 12:09

Evidence Distribution

10 Other / unclassified
  1. Observational / other LOW evidence YELLOW
    Can filamentous algae intensify heat in intertidal rockweed beds? ↗
    PMID 41916040 ↗
    Journal Mar Environ Res
    Year 2026
    Study type Observational / other
    Evidence strength LOW evidence
    PubMed link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41916040/
    Bekkby T et al.. Can filamentous algae intensify heat in intertidal rockweed beds?. Mar Environ Res. 2026. PMID:41916040.
  2. Observational / other LOW evidence YELLOW
    Effect of a Combination of Prebiotic Supplements Based on Fucus and Kelp on the Gut Microbiome of Mice with Induced Inflammation. ↗
    PMID 41900352 ↗
    Journal Microorganisms
    Year 2026
    Study type Observational / other
    Evidence strength LOW evidence
    PubMed link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41900352/
    Khitrov AA et al.. Effect of a Combination of Prebiotic Supplements Based on Fucus and Kelp on the Gut Microbiome of Mice with Induced Inflammation.. Microorganisms. 2026. PMID:41900352.
  3. Observational / other LOW evidence YELLOW
    From Sea to Sight: Fucoidan Protects Against Oxidative Damage in Porcine Retina Organ Culture. ↗
    PMID 41892947 ↗
    Journal Mar Drugs
    Year 2026
    Study type Observational / other
    Evidence strength LOW evidence
    PubMed link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41892947/
    Deppe L et al.. From Sea to Sight: Fucoidan Protects Against Oxidative Damage in Porcine Retina Organ Culture.. Mar Drugs. 2026. PMID:41892947.
  4. Observational / other LOW evidence YELLOW
    Fucoidan from Fucus vesiculosus Protects Retinal Pigment Epithelium from Lipid-Induced Damage Related to AMD. ↗
    PMID 41745467 ↗
    Journal Mar Drugs
    Year 2026
    Study type Observational / other
    Evidence strength LOW evidence
    PubMed link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41745467/
    Hacker F et al.. Fucoidan from Fucus vesiculosus Protects Retinal Pigment Epithelium from Lipid-Induced Damage Related to AMD.. Mar Drugs. 2026. PMID:41745467.
  5. Observational / other LOW evidence YELLOW
    Optimization of an analytical methodology to determine microplastic contamination in different seaweed groups (Phaeophyceae, Rhodophyta and Chlorophyta). ↗
    PMID 41743046 ↗
    Journal MethodsX
    Year 2026
    Study type Observational / other
    Evidence strength LOW evidence
    PubMed link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41743046/
    Pereira R et al.. Optimization of an analytical methodology to determine microplastic contamination in different seaweed groups (Phaeophyceae, Rhodophyta and Chlorophyta).. MethodsX. 2026. PMID:41743046.
  6. Observational / other LOW evidence YELLOW
    Sustainable Continuous Drying of High Moisture Content Seaweed via Twin Screw Extrusion-A Proof of Concept Study and Statistical Analysis. ↗
    PMID 41733308 ↗
    Journal J Food Sci
    Year 2026
    Study type Observational / other
    Evidence strength LOW evidence
    PubMed link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41733308/
    Habeeb Allah A et al.. Sustainable Continuous Drying of High Moisture Content Seaweed via Twin Screw Extrusion-A Proof of Concept Study and Statistical Analysis.. J Food Sci. 2026. PMID:41733308.
  7. Observational / other LOW evidence YELLOW
    Physicochemical, Structural, Molecular, and Thermal Characterization of Fucus vesiculosus Extract-Based Nanofibrous Mats. ↗
    PMID 41626478 ↗
    Journal ACS Omega
    Year 2026
    Study type Observational / other
    Evidence strength LOW evidence
    PubMed link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41626478/
    Bildik F. Physicochemical, Structural, Molecular, and Thermal Characterization of Fucus vesiculosus Extract-Based Nanofibrous Mats.. ACS Omega. 2026. PMID:41626478.
  8. Observational / other LOW evidence YELLOW
    Fucoidan Extracted from Fucus vesiculosus Ameliorates Colitis-Associated Neuroinflammation and Anxiety-like Behavior in Adult C57BL/6 Mice. ↗
    PMID 41590739 ↗
    Journal Mar Drugs
    Year 2026
    Study type Observational / other
    Evidence strength LOW evidence
    PubMed link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41590739/
    Song X et al.. Fucoidan Extracted from Fucus vesiculosus Ameliorates Colitis-Associated Neuroinflammation and Anxiety-like Behavior in Adult C57BL/6 Mice.. Mar Drugs. 2026. PMID:41590739.
  9. Observational / other LOW evidence YELLOW
    Fuc-S, a New Degraded Polysaccharide From Fucoidan, Alleviates Type 2 Diabetes-Associated Liver Injury Through Modulating Gut Microbiota. ↗
    PMID 41550968 ↗
    Journal Food Sci Nutr
    Year 2026
    Study type Observational / other
    Evidence strength LOW evidence
    PubMed link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41550968/
    Du B et al.. Fuc-S, a New Degraded Polysaccharide From Fucoidan, Alleviates Type 2 Diabetes-Associated Liver Injury Through Modulating Gut Microbiota.. Food Sci Nutr. 2026. PMID:41550968.
  10. Observational / other LOW evidence YELLOW
    Improving in vitro Gastrointestinal Stability of Phlorotannins From Food Grade Fucus vesiculosus Extracts Using Cyclodextrins. ↗
    PMID 41527704 ↗
    Journal J Food Sci
    Year 2026
    Study type Observational / other
    Evidence strength LOW evidence
    PubMed link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41527704/
    Reis SF et al.. Improving in vitro Gastrointestinal Stability of Phlorotannins From Food Grade Fucus vesiculosus Extracts Using Cyclodextrins.. J Food Sci. 2026. PMID:41527704.
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════ -->
06

Score Transparency

Q × L × D × S × 10 = 4.0 / 10

The GIRI Score is the product of four independently computed evidence components, each normalised to 0–1, then scaled to 0–10. Every component is derived exclusively from peer-reviewed references and regulatory data — no editorial judgement is applied.

Q
Evidence Quantity 0 / 10
0%

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)

L
Evidence Quality 5 / 10
50%

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.

D
Evidence Direction 5 / 10
Benefit
Risk
50%

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.

S
Safety Signals 5 / 10
50%

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.

0Q × 5L × 5D × 5S = 4.0 / 10

Final GIRI Score for Bladderwrack. 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.
07

Risk Level Classification

MODERATE RISK 4.0/10

Based on available regulatory signals and scientific evidence, this ingredient presents a moderate safety concern. Caution is advised, particularly at high doses or in sensitive populations.

LOW
0–3.0
MODERATE
3.0–5.5
HIGH
5.5–7.5
CRITICAL
7.5–10
4.0

The score pin shows exactly where this ingredient falls on the fixed risk scale.

What drove the Moderate classification for Bladderwrack

GIRI Score 4.0 / 10

A score of 4.0 places this ingredient in the Moderate band. Thresholds: Low 0–3.0 · Moderate 3.0–5.5 · High 5.5–7.5 · Critical 7.5–10.

Evidence Quantity (Q) 0 / 10 refs

0 approved references.

Evidence Quality (L) 50%

Limited — mostly case reports or animal studies (Level 4–5).

Evidence Direction (D) 50% toward risk

Neutral or mixed — benefit and risk signals roughly balanced.

Safety Signals (S) 0 active signals

No active signals — S component is at neutral baseline (0.5), contributing no extra risk weight.

Regulatory Status No restrictions found

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:

LevelScoreMeaning
LOW0.0 – 2.9Sparse or predominantly beneficial evidence. No active safety alerts.
MODERATE3.0 – 5.4Mixed signals — some risk alongside benefit. Caution at high doses or in sensitive groups.
HIGH5.5 – 7.4Multiple studies or regulatory alerts documenting adverse effects. Professional oversight recommended.
CRITICAL7.5 – 10Regulatory 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.

← Back to Ingredient Database

ბოლო სიახლეები

პოპულარული ამბები

კატეგორიები

ჩვენ შესახებ

info@accreditation.ge
ჩვენს შესახებ / რეკლამა / კონტაქტი

გამოგვყევი სოციალურ ქსელებში

© SheniEkimi.ge