Greenlens

Every public rating on one cosmetic, the places they disagree kept visible, and a single score whose weighting you control.

Navigate

  • Browse
  • In your home
  • Ask Sonion
  • Methodology
  • Criteria
  • Extension
  • How scoring works
  • Account

The one rule

We never blend a score that hides who disagrees. Funding model travels with every rating. Weights are computed at read time and never stored.

Cosmetics only · lead with safetyProduct data from public sources incl. Open Beauty Facts & EWG Skin Deep · their ratings never scraped or shown
As an Amazon Associate, Greenlens earns from qualifying purchases. Affiliate income never changes a rating or ranking.PrivacyTerms
Catalog/lavera/Complete Care Zahncreme floridfrei
lavera

Complete Care Zahncreme floridfrei

zahnpasten75mltypically under $12GTIN 4021457629091

Your composite

65OUT OF 100Fair

range 58–77

59▲▼ split
Safety
70
Eco
83
Labor
46
Pkg

Why this score

58-point split

62

Scan

42

Precautionary

100

Tolerance

See why →
Find on Amazon↗

Greenlens earns from qualifying purchases. Payout never affects a rating, a ranking, or the cleaner pick.

In your home

Sort this into a room

Alternatives

Nothing beats this on safety.

Flagged

2 ingredients

What's flagged →

Raters split

Ingredient safety

A 58-point gap between the two loudest voices.

42Greenlens Precautionary ScreenIndependent
vs
100Greenlens Tolerance ScreenIndependent
050100
See why, ingredient by ingredient→

Every rater, every axis

Ingredient safety

58 pts apart
  • 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 →

  • 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 →

✓Also screened, nothing found: California Proposition 65 · US NTP Report on Carcinogens · ECHA SVHC Candidate List · Health Canada Ingredient Hotlist

Environmental

  • Run by a nonprofit. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. Checked this week. about this rater →

✓Also screened, nothing found: EU Microplastics Restriction

Labor

raters agree
  • Run by a nonprofit. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. This rates lavera as a company and applies to everything they make, not this product alone. Checked this week. about this rater →

  • Run by a nonprofit. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. 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

10 ratings · 4 of 4 axes

  • Some ratings rest on an automatic match that has not been human-reviewed.

Weighted by what you care about

Tune your weights

composite recomputes live

+
1.0×
1.0×
1.0×
1.0×
0 means ignored. Higher = more weight in your composite.

What we know about the packaging

Unidentified·0 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.

Ingredients, decoded

Data availability

Fair·10 of 16 characterized

Our sources have reference data on 10 of 16 listed ingredients; 6 are uncharacterized in our data — a gap, not a clean bill.

Worth a look (3)

  • Limonene7/10fragrance materialperfuming · deodorant · solventraters disagree

    ANSES endocrine candidate · flagged by 3 of 9 lists →

  • flavouring6/10raters disagree

    Undisclosed fragrance blend · flagged by 2 of 9 lists

  • Aloe Barbadensis Leaf Juice4/10skin conditioningraters disagree

    IARC possible carcinogen (Group 2B) · flagged by 1 of 9 lists →

✓No flags in our sources (7)

  • Sorbitol
  • water
  • Hydrated Silica
  • Xylitol
  • Glycerinhumectant
  • Echinacea Purpurea Extract
  • Xanthan Gum

No data in our sources (6)

  • Calcium Gabonate
  • Sidum Coco-Sulfate
  • Glen dla Officinalis Flower Extract
  • Salvia Officinalis Leaf Ext ar
  • Glycymhiza Glabra Root Extract
  • as Sal Menthol

Not a verdict — our authorities simply have no reference for these.

What these ingredient tags mean (2)

These describe what an ingredient is, not whether it is a problem. The stance marks above are the ratings; these are not.

  • fragrance materialLimonene

    • Limonene: A citrus-smelling fragrance component named separately on the label; the one name covers three related isomers. EU Regulation (EC) 1223/2009, Annex III entry 88: 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 (37): stock that does not comply, lawfully placed on the Union market before the 31 July 2026 cut-off, may still be made available until 31 July 2028. It is marked on the racemic dl-limonene/Dipentene line and the (S)-(l-limonene) line, but NOT the (R)-p-mentha-1,8-diene (d-limonene) line, CAS 5989-27-5, whose duty was already running as entry 88 before Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/1545 and so needed no transition. All three isomers are declared under the single glossary name "Limonene", so that name on a label does not identify which of them is present.
  • humectantGlycerin

    • Glycerin: A humectant, and one of the two ingredients a comparison of moisturiser components found made a significant difference to skin hydration. FDA OTC skin protectant monograph, 21 CFR 347.10(h), lists glycerin as a skin protectant at 20 to 45%. On the humectant half: Jeong CB, Han JY, Cho JC, Suh KD, Nam GW, "Analysis of electrical property changes of skin by oil-in-water emulsion components", Int J Cosmet Sci 2013;35(4):402-410, DOI 10.1111/ics.12059, PMID 23621673, found that "glycerine and urea showed significant skin hydration effects compared with other humectants".