Open comparison →
STRUCTURED COMPARISON
Build a comparison
Choose two categories from the same family. The same properties, equal visual weight, sources next to the claims they support.
STRUCTURED COMPARISON
Choose two categories from the same family. The same properties, equal visual weight, sources next to the claims they support.
Household chemicals & care
The year-long trial covered children primary teeth; the fourteen-day one ran on enamel blocks worn by adults, measuring remineralisation of a block rather than the course of caries. The platform found no systematic review for fluoride-free paste.
A trial in 207 children over 336 days tested non-inferiority and confirmed it: the difference in the share of children with an increase in lesions was -1.4% against a margin of 20%. A crossover trial in 30 adults found no difference in remineralisation between the pastes. That is two trials against a systematic review — the difference is not only in the conclusion but in the weight of evidence.
Counted for this table only, not for the whole site.
The difference here runs not only through composition but through the weight of the evidence. Behind fluoride toothpaste stands a systematic review: brushing with it is called the principal non-professional measure against caries, and the strength of the effect rises with concentration — together with the risk of fluorosis in developing teeth, which the same review states in the same sentence. Behind fluoride-free paste stand two trials: a year-long one in 207 children, where the difference stayed inside the preset margin, and a fourteen-day one on enamel blocks in 30 adults, where no difference was found — against a paste a third of the usual strength. Fluoride-free paste carries no fluorosis risk by construction. No professional-body recommendation equivalent to the fluoride one was found for it, and the platform presents that silence as neither approval nor prohibition.
FREQUENTLY EXPLORED
Behind fluoride toothpaste stand a systematic review searching several databases and the position of a professional body in which the quality of evidence for each agent was rated with GRADE and the strength of the recommendation stated separately.
A systematic review calls regular brushing with fluoride toothpaste the main measure for preventing caries outside the surgery and notes that the size of the protection varies with fluoride concentration: the higher the concentration, the more protection.
Fluoride-free paste creates no fluorosis risk — by construction, not by measurement: fluorosis is caused by fluoride. The price is the volume of evidence: one year-long trial on primary teeth and one fourteen-day trial on enamel blocks, the latter compared against a 500 ppm paste, a third of the usual adult strength.
The review names both sides in one sentence: a higher fluoride concentration is associated both with stronger caries control and with a raised risk of fluorosis — enamel defects in developing teeth. Hence the conditions in the recommendation: an age-appropriate amount of paste and adult supervision of brushing until seven.
Evidence reviewed: September 3, 2026
Sources are reviewed by the CONTRAST editorial team. External links open in a new tab.