ToothpasteGTIN 3014260096892
Cleaner pick · Safest toothpaste we have rated
RiseWell
Mineral Toothpaste Flavorless+43 on ingredient safety
$12
Ingredient safetyRaters agree
Ranked by safety only. Greenlens earns from qualifying purchases. Payout never affects a rating, a ranking, or the cleaner pick.
Raters split
Ingredient safety
A 48-point gap between the two loudest voices.
42Greenlens Precautionary ScreenIndependent
vs90EU Harmonised Classification (CLP Annex VI)Government
050100
See why, ingredient by ingredientAll 218 cleaner options, safest first We show the best 12, including the strongest on each axis.
Every rater, every axis
Ingredient safety
48 pts apartIndependent — not funded by the brands it rates. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. Checked this week. about this rater →
Independent — not funded by the brands it rates. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. Checked this week. about this rater →
Independent — not funded by the brands it rates. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. Checked this week. about this rater →
A government authority. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. Checked this week. about this rater →
A government authority. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. Checked this week. about this rater →
A government authority. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. Checked this week. about this rater →
Also screened, nothing found: US NTP Report on Carcinogens · ECHA SVHC Candidate List · Health Canada Ingredient Hotlist · California Proposition 65
Recognized on a safer-ingredients list: US EPA Safer Choice recognizes 53% of ingredients as safer choices — a marker, never a score.
Environmental
Also screened, nothing found: EU Microplastics Restriction
Labor
Run by a nonprofit. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. This rates Fluocaril as a company and applies to everything they make, not this product alone. Checked this week. about this rater →
Packaging
Independent — not funded by the brands it rates. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. Checked this week. about this rater →
Coverage & match quality
8 ratings · 3 of 4 axes
- Some ratings rest on an automatic match that has not been human-reviewed.
- Fewer raters reach smaller-brand products, so a missing rating is not a clean bill of health, only a gap.
Weighted by what you care about
Tune your weights
composite recomputes live
+
1.0×
Environmentalno rating
No rater covers this axis for this product, so its weight can't move the score.
1.0×
1.0×
0 means ignored. Higher = more weight in your composite.
What we know about the packaging
Unidentified0 of 1 identified
Nobody recorded what this pack is actually made of beyond “plastic”, so the packaging score is a stand-in for the middle of that range — not a reading of this container.
- Recorded only as “plastic” — no resin code. It could be PET (#1) (widely recyclable) or PVC (#3) (hard to recycle); nothing on record says which, so it counts as 46 out of 100, the middle of that range.
This says how precisely the packaging is described, not how good it is — a fully identified material can still be a bad one.
How we know the packaging
Read from the product photo, not declared by the maker — treat this score as weaker.
The container looks like this, rather than the maker saying so. A photo also cannot show the resin code moulded into the base, so every plastic container reads as “plastic, unspecified” — the cautious end of the plastics range, not a finding about this particular pack.
Ingredients, decoded
Data availability
Robust15 of 17 characterized
Our sources have reference data on 15 of 17 listed ingredients; 2 are uncharacterized in our data — a gap, not a clean bill.
Worth a look (5)
ANSES CMR-listedflagged by 5 of 9 lists →
Undisclosed fragrance blendflagged by 2 of 9 lists →
Strong contact sensitizerflagged by 1 of 9 lists →
EU harmonised skin sensitizerflagged by 2 of 9 lists →
EU-restricted (with limits)flagged by 2 of 9 lists →
No flags in our sources (10)
No data in our sources (2)
Not a verdict — our authorities simply have no reference for these.
What these ingredient tags mean (3)
These describe what an ingredient is, not whether it is a problem. The stance marks above are the ratings; these are not.
common irritantCocamidopropyl Betaine
- Cocamidopropyl Betaine: A mild cleansing agent, but a recurring patch-test finding, usually traced to leftovers from how it is made. American Contact Dermatitis Society, Allergen of the Year 2004 (Fowler JF Jr, Dermatitis 2004;15(1):3-4).
fragrance materialBenzyl Alcohol
- Benzyl Alcohol: Used both as a fragrance component and as a preservative; the EU names it either way. EU Regulation (EC) 1223/2009, Annex III entry 45: a fragrance substance whose presence must be indicated in the list of ingredients above 0,001% in leave-on and 0,01% in rinse-off products, because of established contact-allergy risk. That entry carries transition footnote (38), which is footnote (37) plus a condition: stock that does not comply may still be made available until 31 July 2028 only "provided that they comply with the restrictions applicable on 15 August 2023", and only if it was lawfully placed on the Union market before the 31 July 2026 cut-off. Entry 45 covers its non-preservative use; it is separately an allowed preservative at Annex V entry 34.
undeclared fragrance blendAroma
- Aroma: A blend the label does not itemize, so what is in it cannot be read from the ingredient list. EU Regulation (EC) 1223/2009 permits the collective term "parfum"; the SCCS Opinion on Fragrance Allergens (SCCS/1459/11) reviews the contact-allergy evidence for the substances it can contain.
Where this came from
Product identity (name, brand, category) verified against pharmacie-paris-henri4.fr ↗
Researched facts on Greenlens always carry the page that stated them — nothing is inferred from a model's memory.