This is the one part of the panel with a body of evidence behind it, so it deserves to be set out properly rather than summarised into a claim.
In 2025, Castagna and colleagues published a systematic review and meta-analysis in Nutrients pooling ten randomised controlled trials and 789 participants, all of them adults with type 2 diabetes or overweight. Daily intakes ranged from 5 to 30 millilitres, as liquid or as effervescent tablets, over four to twelve weeks.
The pooled results showed significant reductions in body weight, body mass index and waist circumference. They showed no significant effect on waist-to-hip ratio or on fat mass. A dose-response pattern appeared: modest reductions at 5 to 15 mL a day, and the strongest effects at 30 mL.
The authors' own limitations matter as much as the findings. Heterogeneity between studies was high. Intervention durations were short. Risk of bias was mixed. And funnel-plot asymmetry suggested possible publication bias for the body weight and BMI outcomes, which is the statistical signature of negative results not being published.
So: a real, modest, dose-dependent effect in a specific population, from a literature with known weaknesses. That is a fair thing to build a product on, and it is a long way from the front of this jar.
Where that leaves this productThe strongest effects in that analysis were at 30 mL of liquid vinegar a day. One thousand milligrams of a dried complex, of which some unstated fraction is acid, is not 30 mL. If the vinegar is why you are buying, the arithmetic matters more than the format.