Dentinox Teething Toothpaste Review

28 April 2011

dentinox
My daughter had her first two teeth at four months and now has a mouth full with just the molars still to go.

As a breastfed baby I wasn't very worried about brushing her teeth but as her solid intake has increased and her milk intake decreased, and she started taking an interest in us brushing our teeth, we decided it was time to introduce the concept.

We bought Kyra a kids toothbrush which she has a play with at toothbrushing time. She swirls it around and chews on it a bit and that's all. Unfortunately that doesn't provide much guarantee of coverage!

So, we decided to try Dentinox Teething Toothpaste, a flouride free, saccharin free toothpaste that comes with a thimble like toothbrush. Designed specifically for babies aged 0-2 the toothpaste contains Xylitol – a plant based sugar substitute which has been shown to actively prevent cavities.

The way it works is by putting the finger-brush on your index finger, adding a pea-sized amount of toothpaste and rubbing the teeth gently. The tube is quite small, so it is a little more expensive than regular tooth paste, but it is so very much easier than trying to get into a baby or toddler's mouth with a toothbrush.

My daughter was unsure about it the first time, but she let me get on with it, and afterwards I allowed her to try herself (as you can see in the picture). That way, I'm sure every tooth is getting some cleaning, and she can have a go herself too.

Afterwards I let her have a sip of water, some of which she spits out, but the rest not- which is fine since it contains no fluoride (although there are a few other chemically ingredients, so check if there are any allergies you're concerned with.)

Dentinox Teething Toothpaste can be found at most leading supermarkets.

TOPICS:   Teething   Hospital Bag Items

10 comments

  • Tooth D.
    As a dentist, I would recommend against any toothpaste without fluoride. At 3 years and younger, children should be on toothpaste with at least 1000ppm F, and any older than 3 they should be on proper adult toothpaste - 1450ppm F. If you're interested on official recommendations that all dentists should be closely following, read http://www.dh.gov.uk/prod_consum_dh/groups/dh_digitalassets/documents/digitalasset/dh_102982.pdf .
  • Janet
    Tooth Doctor, while that may have been the message in the 50's, a recent review in The Lancet http://www.fluoridealert.org/bulletins/lancet.html describes fluoride as "an emerging neurotoxic substance" that may damage the developing brain. The National Research Council has identified fluoride as an "endocrine disrupter" that may impair thyroid function (http://www.fluoridealert.org/health/thyroid/), and recent research from Harvard University has found a possible connection between fluoride and bone cancer (http://www.webmd.com/content/Article/120/113995.htm)
  • Tooth D.
    Janet - please could you state your qualifications in the health care profession? There is no doubt at all that there will always be controversy regarding fluoride. I am not here to argue or dispute the evidence as it's on a par with religion for controversy - neither party will be able to convince the other and it will ultimately be pointless. However, what I will inform you is the current view, that has sound, rock solid, indisputable evidence from several scientific studies. IT IS NOT HEARSAY. Your links are all back to an 'anti-fluoride' website - it's not surprising that you can find so many 'antifluoride' articles on there. Fluoride is certainly not a message from the 50s. The document was published in 2010. For your information, the guidance is a conclusion from very solid, scientific studies. You see next to the statement that says "Use only a smear of toothpaste containing no less than 1,000 ppm fluoride" - page 11 of the guidelines - there is a ' I ' . That means that there is "Strong evidence from at least one systematic review of multiple, well-designed, randomised control trial/s." In the eyes of the scientific world, you cannot get better than this information. At this level, It is ESSENTIALLY CONSIDERED FACT. I have no doubt that there can be damage caused by Fluoride. But this is only in very excessive quantities - a child would have to eat tubes of toothpaste daily before they would encounter problems. A small smear is very very safe and will be virtually impossible to cause problems. If you're not a dentist, you have not seen rotting teeth. You have not seen the pain that a dental abscess or tooth ache can cause like we have. If you do not protect your children's and the populations teeth, you can only cause suffering. To cause this suffering would be unethical. Fluoride dramatically reduces tooth decay and if used with a sensible diet can radically reduce or eliminate tooth decay totally. Millions of people use it, and how many are actually suffering because of it? The take away message in the 21st century is that fluoride, in the quantities we recommend, is SAFE, RECOMMENDED, and ETHICAL.
  • Tooth D.
    Ultimately, it's up to you and anyone else reading this blog what you will decide to do. No-one can force you to think otherwise, and I certainly wouldn't want to force my opinion on someone else. I'm merely here to point out that myself and 99% of the dentists IN THE UK would recommend fluoridated toothpaste at a level of 1000ppm for those under 3, and for 1450 for those above 3. Whether or not you choose to follow the instructions of the vast majority of dentists in the country is up to the individual.
  • Luschka O.
    Thanks both for your comments. We've used toothpaste without fluoride for some time, as the water where we lived had fluoride added and we felt that was probably enough - we've since moved and I've not really thought about it again. The point of the post was really more about the usefulness of the finger toothbrush, and although we don't use fluoride, as you say, it's up to each family to decide for themselves. We also liked THIS toothpaste because of the added xylitol.
  • Tooth D.
    One last thing worth mentioning, is that the only time we wouldn't recommend using a 1000ppm Fluoride toothpaste for a child under 3 is if the child clearly isn't capable of spitting out the toothpaste at the end and swallows a lot of it. Toothpaste is NOT to be swallowed! Leaving a little of the froth after spitting is perfectly fine however!
  • Lynley O.
    How do you know that Xylitol is any better than for you than flouride though? (for the record I am a big fan of xylitol as it makes a good sugar substitute too if you are on a sugar free diet as I was for over a year). I agree with Tooth Doctor. I can't claim to understand all the science - I'm not a doctor or a scientist. But we've always used toothpaste with flouride. We have always brushed twice a day too. It is important. Tooth ache hurts, and small children can't always tell you why they are being grouchy even when they do have the language to do so.
  • Luschka O.
    I guess it's a personal decision. My child is breastfed, we keep sugar to a minimum and she's pretty good at communicating. As non scientists we can only go on the information we have at hand, so I prefer to use xylitol to aid in preventing tooth decay. We've also always been okay with BPA, tabacco and so on - till new research told us it's not as okay as we thought, so to me 'we've always done it' isn't really an argument. If your child has massive tooth decay and toothache and whatever before they can communicate with you, my guess is your problem is bigger than just fluoride in toothpaste and you should probably go see a dentist :) Again, I thought the toothbrush was fab though, and I'm sure it can be used with the toothpaste of your choice.
  • Lynley O.
    But the information to hand, the most reliable and thorough research we have, says that flouride is OK. Also you have to keep in mind that sugar is not the only cause of tooth decay. In fact, it isn't even the worst. Starches, such as those found in potatoes, are far worse on teeth if left on over night than sugars that dissolve fairly quickly. Final point - I don't mean to be pedantic but I did clearly state that children who have language (such as aged 3 to 6) are still not always able to communicate pain or where that pain is. I agree new research comes up, but you have to go by the best possible research there is. Otherwise you have to not use anything. It could be that next week a research paper throws up questions about Xylitol. The best possible research that is available makes it clear that flouride in those low quantities is beneficial.
  • Lynley O.
    This is a subject very close to my heart. My family have dreadfully weak teeth, with lots of problems. My son has inherited these teeth and I've spent a lot of time researching how to best protect teeth. We have used special brushes since before he first cut a tooth. These sorts of finger brushes have been around for a long time. There's lots of different combinations of foods that affect teeth decay. You need to look at how starches react with teeth, as well as sugars, and it isn't just a case of being careful with fruit juice but also fruit, and what sorts of food you eat with fruit and when you eat it. How soon you eat after brushing. And there's lots more. And even with that, and regular six month checkups, my son has still had two cavities in his back teeth. That would have been far worse I expect if we hadn't been so diligent. It isn't just a matter of children only getting tooth decay if they are fed a diet of sweets, biscuits and junk food you know (and for the record, my son hardly eats any junk food).

What do you think?

Connect with Facebook, Twitter, or just enter your email to sign in and comment.

Your comment