Greenlens

Navigate

  • Browse
  • In your home
  • Ask Sonion
  • Methodology
  • Criteria
  • Extension
  • How scoring works
  • Account
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/Colgate/Plax Soft Mint Mouthwash
Plax Soft Mint Mouthwash
Colgate

Plax Soft Mint Mouthwash

MouthwashGTIN 8714789726250
Xylimelts Dry Mouth Melts, Mint Free (2020 formulation)

Cleaner pick · Safest mouthwash we have rated

Oracoat

Xylimelts Dry Mouth Melts, Mint Free (2020 formulation)

+46 on ingredient safety

Ingredient safetyRaters agree
Find on Amazon ↗See all 502 cleaner options →

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

Your composite

43OUT OF 100Poor

range 39–54

54▲▼ split
Safety
—
Eco
30
Labor
46
Pkg

Why this score

40-point split

58

Scan

42

Precautionary

82

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

Cleaner options

502 found

See better →

Flagged

4 ingredients

What's flagged →

Raters split

Ingredient safety

A 43-point gap between the two loudest voices.

42Greenlens Precautionary ScreenIndependent
vs
85Health Canada Ingredient HotlistGovernment
050100
See why, ingredient by ingredient→

All 502 cleaner options, safest first → We show the best 12, including the strongest on each axis.

Every rater, every axis

Ingredient safety

43 pts apart
  • 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. This score changed Sep 1, 2026: source data updated. 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. This score changed Sep 1, 2026: source data updated. about this rater →

✓Also screened, nothing found: ECHA SVHC Candidate List · EU Harmonised Classification (CLP Annex VI) · US NTP Report on Carcinogens · California Proposition 65 · ANSES Endocrine Disruptors · IARC Monographs

✓Recognized on a safer-ingredients list: US EPA Safer Choice recognizes 54% 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 Colgate 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

    6 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

    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.

    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

    Robust·12 of 13 characterized

    Our sources have reference data on 12 of 13 listed ingredients; 1 is uncharacterized in our data — a gap, not a clean bill.

    Worth a look (4)

    • flavouring6/10raters disagree

      Undisclosed fragrance blend · flagged by 2 of 9 lists →

    • sodium fluoride4/10antiplaque · oral careraters disagree

      EU-restricted (with limits) · flagged by 3 of 9 lists →

    • ci 191404/10colorant · hair dyeingraters disagree

      EU-restricted (with limits) · flagged by 2 of 9 lists →

    • ci 420514/10colorantraters disagree

      EU-restricted (with limits) · flagged by 2 of 9 lists →

    ✓No flags in our sources (8)

    • water
    • glycerinhumectant
    • propylene glycolcommon irritant
    • sorbitol
    • poloxamer 407
    • cetylpyridinium chloride
    • potassium sorbate
    • sodium saccharin

    No data in our sources (1)

    • inneholder

    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.

    • common irritantpropylene glycol

      • propylene glycol: A solvent that shows up in patch-test clinics, more often as irritation than as allergy. American Contact Dermatitis Society, Allergen of the Year 2018 (Jacob SE, Scheman A, McGowan MA, Dermatitis 2018;29(1):3-5).
    • 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".

    Where this came from

    Product identity (name, brand, category) verified against superdrug.com ↗

    Researched facts on Greenlens always carry the page that stated them — nothing is inferred from a model's memory.