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/HEMA/toothpaste kids 0-5
H
HEMA

toothpaste kids 0-5

open beauty facts75mlGTIN 8718537598830
Kids Mineral Toothpaste

Cleaner pick · Safest teeth we have rated

RiseWell

Kids Mineral Toothpaste

+45 on ingredient safety

$12

Ingredient safetyRaters agree
Find on Amazon ↗See all 63 cleaner options →

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

Your composite

66OUT OF 100Fair

range 63–75

55▲▼ split
Safety
90
Eco
74
Labor
46
Pkg

Why this score

46-point split

62

Scan

42

Precautionary

88

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

63 found

See better →

Flagged

4 ingredients

What's flagged →

Raters split

Ingredient safety

A 46-point gap between the two loudest voices.

42Greenlens Precautionary ScreenIndependent
vs
88Greenlens Tolerance ScreenIndependent
050100
See why, ingredient by ingredient→

All 63 cleaner options, safest first → We show the best 12, including the strongest on each axis.

Every rater, every axis

Ingredient safety

46 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 →

  • 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 →

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

✓Recognized on a safer-ingredients list: US EPA Safer Choice recognizes 67% of ingredients as safer choices — a marker, never a score.

Environmental

  • A government authority. Auto-linked to this product, not yet human-reviewed. Checked this week. about this rater →

Labor

  • 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

9 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

Robust·15 of 15 characterized

Our sources have reference data on all 15 listed ingredients.

Worth a look (5)

  • titanium dioxide8/10uv filter · uv absorber · colorantraters disagree

    ANSES CMR-listed · flagged by 5 of 9 lists →

  • 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 →

  • citric acid4/10fragrance · chelating · bufferingraters disagree

    Health Canada Hotlist — restricted · flagged by 1 of 9 lists →

  • carbomer4/10emulsion stabilising · gel forming · viscosity controllingraters disagree

    EU microplastics-restricted · flagged by 1 of 9 lists →

✓No flags in our sources (10)

  • water
  • sorbitol
  • silica
  • glycerinhumectant
  • propylene glycolcommon irritant
  • cellulose gum
  • sodium c14 16 olefin sulfonate
  • xylitol
  • disodium phosphate
  • sodium saccharin
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".