GUM Butlerweave Waxed Mint Dental Floss
Lower concern, but brand provides no PFAS disclosure on product.
Waxed dental floss typically uses paraffin or beeswax coatings without known PFAS. GUM offers no public PFAS statement, leaving uncertainty about supplier practices.
We flunk more products than we pass. This one earned its grade. How we grade
Material
nylon/polyester floss with wax coating
Brand disclosure
Brand is silent on PFAS
Lab data
No public lab test
You may also be interested in
Top-graded picks in the categories readers replace first, every one scored on the same rubric.
Aqua Pure
3M Aqua-Pure AP802B Whole House Filter Housing
- polypropylene filter housing, carbon/sediment cartridge
- We found no PFAS statement from the brand
- Bacterial growth in spent cartridges
3 hazards checked on this product. See all of them.
Aquasure
Premier Series 75 GPD Under Sink Reverse Osmosis Water Filtration System
- RO membrane, carbon filters, stainless steel housing
- We found no PFAS statement from the brand
- Bacterial and microbial growth in housing and filters
4 hazards checked on this product. See all of them.
Avocado
Vegan Mattress
- organic cotton, natural latex, coconut coir, recycled steel coils
- The brand calls it PFAS-free, which we have not verified
- Heavy metals
2 hazards checked on this product. See all of them.
What GUM Butlerweave Waxed Mint Dental Floss is made of, ingredients and materials
GUM Butlerweave is nylon or polyester filament wound with a wax coating (typically paraffin or beeswax-based) to aid gliding and plaque removal. Nylon and polyester are inert thermoplastics that do not leach under normal oral use conditions, and wax coatings are food-contact approved and not known to release harmful compounds during daily flossing. The 'Butlerweave' construction refers to the braid pattern, not a chemical treatment, so no additional coatings or resins are implied.
What’s concerning
Category baseline
The starting point for this type of product, before anything specific to this product is counted.
No PFAS disclosure
No public statement from the brand about PFAS in this product.
Fragrance allergens (if flavored)
Product is labeled 'Mint' but no detailed fragrance disclosure is available from the brand. Mint flavoring is commonly GRAS and low-allergen, but individuals with essential oil sensitivities may react; contact dermatitis is rare but not ruled out for sensitive oral tissues.
Allergic contact reaction to nylon or polyester
True allergy to nylon or polyester fibers is extremely rare, but individuals with sensitive gums or latex-like sensitivities may experience mild irritation; wax coating typically mitigates this risk by providing a smoother surface.
What’s reassuring
Base material not linked to PFAS
The main material recorded for this product is not one associated with PFAS.
Formaldehyde / VOCs
Nylon and polyester fibers are not produced via formaldehyde-releasing processes, and wax coatings do not contain formaldehyde. No evidence of formaldehyde releasers in this product type.
Source, ATSDR ↗Heavy metals
Wax-coated floss does not use talc, and paraffin or beeswax coatings are not known to be contaminated with heavy metals in established commercial products. No evidence on record.
Source, FDA ↗Microplastics
Nylon and polyester fibers are durable under oral use and do not shed microplastics during normal flossing. The floss is designed to be disposed of after use, not ingested or fragmented.
Source, EPA ↗The full breakdown
The brand's record and disclosure
Sunstar (GUM parent company) does not publicly disclose PFAS testing or presence statements for this product, though the brand has no known major safety recalls or regulatory actions tied to floss. GUM products are widely sold and generally comply with FDA and EU cosmetic/oral care regulations. No independent testing or third-party certifications (such as EWG verification) are on record for this specific floss.
How it compares in its category
Waxed nylon or polyester floss is the conventional standard; this product is typical of mainstream oral care floss and carries the same low hazard profile as competitors like Oral-B or Colgate floss. Unwaxed alternatives offer no safety advantage and may be less durable. Silk floss exists but is not demonstrably safer and degrades faster.
If you buy it
Use daily as directed; no special storage is needed beyond keeping the container closed to prevent drying. Do not ingest; floss is not meant to be swallowed. Replace the spool when floss becomes frayed or difficult to handle. No heating, bleaching, or prolonged water immersion will occur in normal use, so coating degradation risk is negligible.
What we don’t know
- Basis
- Model estimate, 72% confidence, not a lab result
- Lab test
- None on record for this exact product
- Brand statement
- GUM has made none
Formulations change between production runs, so check the current label. How we grade.
Better-graded alternatives in Dental Floss
Oral-B
ORAL B Glide Pro-Health Floss
- nylon monofilament
- The brand calls it PFAS-free, which we have not verified
- Microplastics
2 hazards checked on this product. See all of them.
DentaFloss
Cocofloss Dental Floss
- Coconut fiber-based floss
- The brand calls it PFAS-free, which we have not verified
- Microbial growth in natural fiber storage
DentaFloss
Oral-B Essential Floss
- Nylon floss, waxed coating
- The brand calls it PFAS-free, which we have not verified
- Starting grade for this product type
More dental floss grades
How we score, every product runs through the same public 0-100 rubric based on materials, coatings, brand disclosure, lab findings, and recalls. See the full methodology → Spotted a mistake? Report an error.