PFAS in Toothpaste, and Why This Is Not the Category to Worry About

We graded fifteen toothpastes from Colgate, Crest, Sensodyne and Tom's of Maine. Every single one scored 75 out of 100. Not one product separated from the rest, in either direction.

That uniformity is the answer to the question people are actually asking. Toothpaste is an aqueous gel of fluoride or a fluoride-free equivalent, silica, humectants and flavor. There is no coating, no barrier layer, no water-repellent finish and no film former, which are the things that drive low grades everywhere else in our database. PFAS is not the useful question to ask about toothpaste, and we would rather say so than manufacture a ranking that does not exist.

What is worth knowing is what our records did flag, and it is not PFAS.

Every product we graded

Product	PFAS grade	Base
Colgate Cavity Protection Toothpaste	Excellent, 75/100	Aqueous gel with fluoride and silica
Colgate Whitening Gel Toothpaste	Excellent, 75/100	Aqueous gel with fluoride and silica
Colgate Optic White Toothpaste	Excellent, 75/100	Aqueous gel base with fluoride and silica
Crest Cavity Protection Toothpaste	Excellent, 75/100	Aqueous gel or paste with fluoride and silica
Crest Clean Mint Pro-Health Toothpaste	Excellent, 75/100	Aqueous gel base
Crest Pro-Health Advanced Deep Clean	Excellent, 75/100	Aqueous gel toothpaste base
Crest 3D White Advanced Glamorous White	Excellent, 75/100	Aqueous gel with fluoride
Crest Complete Scope Whitening Toothpaste	Excellent, 75/100	Aqueous gel or paste, standard components
Crest Complete Scope Outlast Ultra	Excellent, 75/100	Aqueous gel base with fluoride and silica
Sensodyne Cavity + Sensitivity Toothpaste	Excellent, 75/100	Aqueous gel, standard formulation
Sensodyne Pronamel Gentle Whitening	Excellent, 75/100	Aqueous gel with calcium compounds
Sensodyne Repair and Protect Whitening	Excellent, 75/100	Aqueous gel toothpaste
Tom's of Maine Antiplaque Whitening	Excellent, 75/100	Water-based gel with sorbitol
Tom's of Maine Fluoride-Free Antiplaque	Excellent, 75/100	Glycerin, calcium carbonate and silica

How we graded these

Every grade in this article is a model-based estimate built from publicly available ingredient disclosures and brand documentation, not a lab test performed by our team. A high score means lower concern based on reviewed sources, never PFAS-free and never safe. No toothpaste in this category carried published independent lab data, and none of these brands makes a public no-PFAS statement we could record, which is why the whole category sits at 75 rather than higher. You can compare any specific product using our PFAS product finder.

What our records actually flagged, since it was not PFAS

Three things came up repeatedly across these fifteen products, and none of them is a fluorinated compound.

Silica abrasion. Hydrated silica is the scrubbing agent in most toothpaste, including every whitening formula here. It is what removes surface stain, and it is also what wears enamel if the abrasivity is high or brushing is hard. Whitening pastes tend to sit higher on abrasivity than cavity-protection ones. Enamel does not grow back, so this is the flag on this page that actually compounds over a lifetime.

Sodium lauryl sulfate. SLS is the detergent that makes toothpaste foam. It is a recorded irritant for some people and is associated with mouth ulcers in those prone to them. It does nothing for cleaning, it is there for the sensation of lather, and SLS-free formulas exist across most of these brands.

Fluoride dose. Fluoride is the reason toothpaste prevents decay, and our records note swallowing rather than brushing as the exposure of interest. For anyone using toothpaste normally, spitting rather than rinsing is the standard guidance, and that is a dentistry question rather than a chemistry one. Tom's of Maine is the fluoride-free option in this set, which is a trade against cavity protection rather than a free upgrade.

What to avoid

• Choosing toothpaste on PFAS grounds. Fifteen products, one grade, and no meaningful separation to choose on.
• Assuming whitening is free. Whitening formulas generally rely on more abrasive silica, and enamel wear is permanent.
• Assuming natural or fluoride-free is a straightforward upgrade. Dropping fluoride is a trade against decay protection, not a removal of a contaminant.
• Reading our 75 as a clean bill. It reflects a formula with no PFAS-relevant components described, on products where no brand publishes a PFAS statement and none has been tested independently in our records.

If you are looking at the rest of the bathroom, our dental floss category is the one next to this that does separate, because some floss is coated and some is not, and our toothpaste category page lists every product we hold. The PFAS hazard page explains which product types genuinely carry this risk.

Our pick

On PFAS grounds we do not have one, because there is nothing to separate. Every toothpaste here grades 75 out of 100 and we are not going to invent a winner out of a flat field. If you want our reading of the flags that did appear, an SLS-free cavity-protection paste avoids both the detergent irritation and the higher abrasivity of whitening formulas, and Sensodyne Pronamel is the entry here built around enamel rather than stain removal. That is a reading of our own recorded concerns, not dental advice, and the right toothpaste for you is a question for your dentist. These are estimates built from disclosed ingredients, not laboratory proof, and no product here is being called PFAS-free or safe by us.

FAQ

Does toothpaste contain PFAS?

None of the fifteen toothpastes we graded is described with a component our model associates with PFAS. Toothpaste is an aqueous gel with abrasives, humectants and flavor, with no coating, barrier or film former of the kind that drives low grades in other categories. That is an assessment of ingredient descriptions, not laboratory testing, which no brand here has published.

Why does every product score exactly the same?

Because our model responds to described components, and these formulas are materially the same as each other on the measures it uses. When fifteen products from four brands land on one number, the honest read is that the category does not vary on this question rather than that our data is thin.

What should I actually look at when buying toothpaste?

Based on what our records flagged rather than on PFAS, the three recurring items are silica abrasivity, which matters most in whitening formulas, sodium lauryl sulfate, which is an irritant for some people and is purely for foam, and fluoride, which is the active ingredient doing the decay protection. Weighing those is a conversation for a dentist.

Is fluoride-free toothpaste better?

Not on this measure. The fluoride-free product here grades identically at 75, so our data shows no PFAS-related difference. Removing fluoride changes how well the toothpaste prevents decay, which is a dental trade-off rather than a chemical improvement.