Safety Profile
Known Safety Concerns
- Trace sulphites from production process -- relevant for sulphite allergy
- Oesophageal and dental enamel risk if taken undiluted
- May lower blood glucose -- relevant for diabetics on medication
- Always dilute before consumption
Contraindications
- Trace sulphites from production process -- relevant for sulphite allergy
- Oesophageal and dental enamel risk if taken undiluted
Interactions
Information not yet available for this ingredient profile.
Evidence and Scientific Findings
Ingredient Overview
Grape vinegar contains acetic acid plus polyphenols from grapes. Used in supplements for its putative blood glucose lowering and digestive benefits. Similar safety profile to apple cider vinegar. May contain trace sulphites from wine production — relevant for sulphite-sensitive individuals. The acetic acid content has the same oesophageal and dental considerations.
Biological and Chemical Classification
- Scientific Name
- Vitis vinifera grape wine vinegar
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%)
- Trace sulphites from production process -- relevant for sulphite allergy
- Oesophageal and dental enamel risk if taken undiluted
- May lower blood glucose -- relevant for diabetics on medication
- Always dilute before consumption
The available scientific evidence for Grape Vinegar 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, 12:43
Evidence Distribution
-
Observational / other LOW evidence YELLOWEvaluation of the potential of grape vinegar pomace as adsorbent for Hg(II) removal. ↗Ku0131nalu0131 E et al.. Evaluation of the potential of grape vinegar pomace as adsorbent for Hg(II) removal.. Sci Rep. 2025. PMID:41258005.PMID 41258005 ↗Journal Sci RepYear 2025Study type Observational / otherEvidence strength LOW evidencePubMed link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41258005/
-
Observational / other LOW evidence YELLOWEffect of Marination on the Formation of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons in Grilled Vegetables. ↗Kacmaz Ozcetin S et al.. Effect of Marination on the Formation of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons in Grilled Vegetables.. Food Sci Nutr. 2025. PMID:40630425.PMID 40630425 ↗Journal Food Sci NutrYear 2025Study type Observational / otherEvidence strength LOW evidencePubMed link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40630425/
-
Observational / other LOW evidence YELLOWEffect of Vinegar on the Oxidative Stability of Mayonnaise During its Storage. ↗Alnokkari A. Effect of Vinegar on the Oxidative Stability of Mayonnaise During its Storage.. J Chromatogr Sci. 2024. PMID:37224456.PMID 37224456 ↗Journal J Chromatogr SciYear 2024Study type Observational / otherEvidence strength LOW evidencePubMed link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37224456/
-
Observational / other LOW evidence YELLOWCharacterization of Fruit Vinegars via Bioactive and Organic Acid Profile Using Chemometrics. ↗Yildiz E. Characterization of Fruit Vinegars via Bioactive and Organic Acid Profile Using Chemometrics.. Foods. 2023. PMID:37893661.PMID 37893661 ↗Journal FoodsYear 2023Study type Observational / otherEvidence strength LOW evidencePubMed link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37893661/
-
Observational / other LOW evidence YELLOWDetection of the Microbial Composition of Some Commercial Fermented Liquid Products via Metagenomic Analysis. ↗u00c7elik Dou011fan C et al.. Detection of the Microbial Composition of Some Commercial Fermented Liquid Products via Metagenomic Analysis.. Foods. 2023. PMID:37835192.PMID 37835192 ↗Journal FoodsYear 2023Study type Observational / otherEvidence strength LOW evidencePubMed link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37835192/
-
Observational / other LOW evidence YELLOWImproving the textural and microstructural quality of cow meat by black chokeberry, grape, and hawthorn vinegar-based marination. ↗Unal K et al.. Improving the textural and microstructural quality of cow meat by black chokeberry, grape, and hawthorn vinegar-based marination.. Food Sci Nutr. 2023. PMID:37823113.PMID 37823113 ↗Journal Food Sci NutrYear 2023Study type Observational / otherEvidence strength LOW evidencePubMed link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37823113/
-
Observational / other LOW evidence YELLOWMarination with aronia, grape and hawthorn vinegars affects the technological, textural, microstructural and sensory properties of spent chicken meat. ↗Dilek NM et al.. Marination with aronia, grape and hawthorn vinegars affects the technological, textural, microstructural and sensory properties of spent chicken meat.. Br Poult Sci. 2023. PMID:36607340.PMID 36607340 ↗Journal Br Poult SciYear 2023Study type Observational / otherEvidence strength LOW evidencePubMed link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36607340/
-
Observational / other LOW evidence YELLOWThe Effects of the Marination Process with Different Vinegar Varieties on Various Quality Criteria and Heterocyclic Aromatic Amine Formation in Beef Steak. ↗Fencioglu H et al.. The Effects of the Marination Process with Different Vinegar Varieties on Various Quality Criteria and Heterocyclic Aromatic Amine Formation in Beef Steak.. Foods. 2022. PMID:37431000.PMID 37431000 ↗Journal FoodsYear 2022Study type Observational / otherEvidence strength LOW evidencePubMed link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37431000/
-
Observational / other LOW evidence YELLOWOrigin of the effects of optical spectrum and flow behaviour in determining the quality of dry fig, jujube, pomegranate, date palm and… ↗u00d6ztu00fcrk M et al.. Origin of the effects of optical spectrum and flow behaviour in determining the quality of dry fig, jujube, pomegranate, date palm and concentrated grape vinegars.. Spectrochim Acta A Mol Biomol Spectrosc. 2022. PMID:34990917.PMID 34990917 ↗Journal Spectrochim Acta A Mol Biomol SpectroscYear 2022Study type Observational / otherEvidence strength LOW evidencePubMed link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34990917/
-
Observational / other LOW evidence YELLOWThe Influence of Time and Storage Conditions on the Antioxidant Potential and Total Phenolic Content in Homemade Grape Vinegars. ↗Antoniewicz J et al.. The Influence of Time and Storage Conditions on the Antioxidant Potential and Total Phenolic Content in Homemade Grape Vinegars.. Molecules. 2021. PMID:34946694.PMID 34946694 ↗Journal MoleculesYear 2021Study type Observational / otherEvidence strength LOW evidencePubMed link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34946694/
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 Grape Vinegar. 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 Grape Vinegar
A score of 2.0 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.