Best toothpaste for kids [Ökotest 2023]

Another report by Ökotest is this time about toothpaste for children. And here, right at the beginning, justified criticism is leveled at a number of toothpastes on the market that come up with inadmissible additives.

In this case, this substance is titanium dioxide, which has been banned in food since August 2022 according to Ökotest. We also learn that EFSA, the European Food Safety Authority, had already classified titanium oxide as unsafe in 2021. Because studies at the EFSA had shown that titanium dioxide can damage the genetic material.

Titanium dioxide is also available in masks as nanoparticles, which can then be inhaled by the wearer:

A number of dietary supplements, but also medicines from conventional medicine, contain titanium dioxide:

And even food has this questionable substance:

So why ban titanium dioxide in toothpaste for children? Toothpaste is not usually eaten. But children, especially toddlers, swallow bits of toothpaste relatively often, so these admixtures get into the digestive system. Given that children are supposed to brush their teeth at least twice a day, there’s plenty of opportunity to swallow a lot of toothpaste containing titanium dioxide, so it’s almost a “titanium dioxide meal.”

And titanium dioxide is certainly not a substance that is conducive to the healthy development of children. It is therefore to be welcomed that Ökotest makes sure that these substances are not found in children’s toothpaste.

Of the 24 toothpastes for children up to six years of age, there were five preparations with titanium dioxide, three of which also contained PEG (polyethylene glycol), which is known to cause allergic reactions. Incidentally, PEG is also included in the “corona vaccinations” from Pfizer/BioNTech.

These are the products “Today Dent Kids Milk Teeth”, “Blend-A-Med Blondi Gel, Strawberry Flavor”, “Odol-Med 3 First Teeth”, “Odol-Med 3 Milk Teeth, Gentle Coin” and “Putzi Children’s Tooth Gel”. The product named first received the grade “poor”. All others received the grade “insufficient”.

Ökotest even found lead in one of the tested products (“Ben & Anna toothpaste…”). Here, too, the grade “inadequate” was awarded.

Up to this point one has to agree with Ökotest. With absolute certainty, these substances do not belong in children’s toothpaste and children’s mouths. After that, however, the author hastens to thoroughly destroy the good impression.

By the way: If you are interested in such information, then you should definitely request my free practice newsletter “Independent. Naturally. clear edge.” to:

Toxic additives sometimes no, then yes

What does not apply to lead, titanium dioxide, PEG, etc., does apply to a well-known substance: fluoride. Because fluoride must not only be in the children’s toothpastes, no, the right dose must even be given in order to receive an acceptable rating in the Ökotest.

While Ökotest correctly regards titanium dioxide, lead, etc. as with a high probability of being toxic for children, this strangely no longer applies to fluoride at all. There is not even a shadow of a doubt expressed in this test that fluoride could be harmful to children.

On the contrary: The test requires at least 1000 ppm fluoride so that a good rating can be given. Do children not swallow toothpaste containing fluoride? Is swallowed toothpaste with titanium dioxide dangerous for children, swallowed toothpaste with fluoride harmless, although it is a neurotoxic substance?

And why so much? Because fluoride is said to be important in preventing tooth decay? It is interesting that the figure of 1000 ppm comes from a “nationwide network” that calls itself “Gesund ins Leben”.

A look at the imprint [1] This network shows that it is a website of the Federal Agency for Agriculture and Food. So the Ökotest is once again acting as the mouthpiece of politics when it comes to certain “dogmas”, such as fluoride in toothpaste.

Apparently, the numerous scientific studies on fluoridation and the resulting problems for children and adults have not yet arrived in politics. Or you don’t want to hear anything about it, comparable to the side effects of the “corona vaccinations”. Here is a small selection where I discussed relevant work:

It is no longer a secret that low levels of fluoride in newborns lead to reduced cognitive abilities and intelligence. Fluorine itself is considered very toxic. One has to wonder why this chemical element as a salt (fluoride) is suddenly not only harmless, but even necessary.

It is interesting that even the German version of Wikipedia [2] admits that in 2013 EFSA published an opinion which concluded that fluoride was not an essential nutrient. Why not? Because, and now it gets interesting, it “serves neither growth processes nor tooth development and signs of a fluoride deficiency could not be identified“.

There are also reports that fluoride occurs naturally, as well as in drinking water without human intervention, so we can assume natural fluoridation. Why then an additional supply of fluoride via the toothpaste?

In the case of vitamins, the Ökotest also rejects an additional supply of vitamins, since we all supposedly absorb enough vitamins through our diet and a vitamin deficiency would not exist. Why doesn’t this also apply to fluorides? Why do we have to lead more than nature already has in store for us? Or are fluorides less toxic than vitamins?

That is the absurdity of the eco-test and its way of assessing products: According to EFSA, fluoride no essential nutrient. But of all things, the Ökotest would like to see this additionally supplemented. On the other hand, vitamins, which are usually essential and have a nutrient character, are highly dangerous according to the Ökotest if they are supplemented in addition to the food supply.

However, one has to be surprised by the test results, since there were some test candidates that did not contain fluoride but still did not receive a bad rating, such as “Weleda children’s tooth gel” (good), “Logodent Happy kids”, “Niyok Children’s Toothpaste from Coconut Oil”, “Urtekram Fuoride Free Children’s Toothpaste” and two others (satisfactory).

Only a toothpaste without fluoride received the rating “insufficient”, most likely because it contained titanium dioxide.

Only four toothpastes received the grade “very good” and all contained 1000 ppm fluoride. Great!

By the way: If you are interested in such information, then you should definitely request my free practice newsletter “Independent. Naturally. clear edge.” to:

Sources:

1. Imprint – Healthy into life
2. Fluoride – Wikipedia

Featured Image: pixabay.com – stevepb

This article was first published on February 13th, 2023.