Optimal Toothpaste Selection: An Exploratory Analysis of Cavity Prevention, Fluoride Concerns, and Non-Mainstream Approaches

A guest post by Gemini 2.5 Deep Research

The entirety of the below was written by Gemini 2.5 Pro Deep Research, using a prompt generated via Alex Lawsen’s Deep Research prompting method. I wanted to know what the best toothpaste was and why, considering alternatives to fluoride (or if it even made sense to consider alternatives to fluoride). I wanted to share the results 1.) because they’re kind of interesting and 2.) because I’m pretty impressed with Gemini 2.5 and this prompting method.

Executive Summary

This report provides an exploratory analysis of optimal toothpaste selection strategies, focusing on maximizing cavity prevention while addressing concerns regarding fluoride exposure, particularly those prevalent within niche health optimization communities such as biohackers and rationalists. The analysis integrates established scientific consensus with perspectives and experimental findings observed within these unconventional forums.

Key Findings: The scientific evidence strongly supports the efficacy of topical fluoride, delivered via toothpaste, mouth rinses, and professional applications, as a primary strategy for preventing dental caries.¹ Its mechanisms involve inhibiting demineralization, promoting remineralization of tooth enamel, and interfering with bacterial metabolism.¹ However, persistent concerns regarding potential systemic effects of fluoride, particularly related to neurotoxicity and developmental issues, circulate within niche communities, often stemming from studies on high exposure levels or water fluoridation debates, which may not directly translate to risks from typical toothpaste use.⁴ Among fluoride alternatives, hydroxyapatite (HAP), especially nano-hydroxyapatite (nHAp), emerges as the most scientifically validated option. Multiple studies, including systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials (RCTs), demonstrate its effectiveness in caries prevention, often achieving non-inferiority compared to standard fluoride toothpastes.⁶ HAP offers the advantage of being biomimetic and avoiding the risk of dental fluorosis.⁶ However, the use of nano-hydroxyapatite introduces specific safety considerations regarding particle shape and potential long-term effects, requiring further investigation, though rod-shaped particles are generally considered safer than needle-shaped ones.⁹ Other alternatives like xylitol show some promise, particularly as an adjunct (e.g., in gum) or when added to fluoride toothpaste, but evidence for its standalone efficacy in toothpaste is less robust and dose-dependent.¹¹ Theobromine ¹² and oral probiotics ¹³ represent emerging areas with limited high-quality clinical evidence for caries prevention currently.

Niche Community Perspectives: Within biohacking, rationalist, and health optimization circles, there is notable skepticism towards fluoride, driven by a precautionary approach to potential systemic risks, even if low-probability.⁴ These communities often value "natural" or biomimetic solutions, leading to significant interest in and endorsement of HAP/nHAp toothpastes.¹⁵ Personal experimentation and systematic self-tracking are common practices, though the resulting anecdotal evidence has limitations.¹⁶ Concerns often focus on systemic fluoride exposure (e.g., water fluoridation) and are sometimes conflated with the risks and benefits of topical application via toothpaste.¹⁷

Recommendations: For individuals prioritizing effective cavity prevention while minimizing fluoride exposure, HAP/nHAp toothpaste represents the most evidence-based alternative currently available. Selection should favor products specifying non-needle-shaped nanoparticles and providing concentration details where possible, acknowledging the ongoing research into long-term nano-safety.⁹ Xylitol, used at appropriate doses (5-10g daily, spread over multiple exposures, often via gum or mints), may serve as a beneficial adjunct.¹⁹ Caution is advised regarding other alternatives like theobromine and probiotics as primary anti-caries agents due to insufficient clinical validation. Regardless of toothpaste choice, maintaining consistent oral hygiene practices (brushing, flossing) and regular professional dental care remains paramount for overall oral health.

Main Body

1. Context: Fluoride, Oral Health, and Niche Community Concerns

1.1 The Established Role of Fluoride in Caries Prevention

Dental caries remains a highly prevalent disease globally.⁶ For decades, fluoride has been the cornerstone of preventive strategies, a status supported by major health organizations including the American Dental Association (ADA), World Health Organization (WHO), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP).¹ The widespread use of fluoride, primarily through community water fluoridation and fluoridated toothpaste, is credited as a major factor in the significant decline in caries prevalence and severity observed in many developed countries over the past half-century.² Fluoride toothpaste constitutes over 95% of the US toothpaste market, and the ADA requires its presence for products receiving its Seal of Acceptance.¹

The primary anti-caries effect of fluoride is achieved through topical application to the tooth surfaces.² Its mechanisms are multi-faceted:

1. Inhibition of Demineralization: Fluoride present in plaque fluid and saliva reduces the dissolution of enamel minerals when challenged by acids produced by bacteria.¹

2. Promotion of Remineralization: Fluoride enhances the deposition of calcium and phosphate ions back into partially demineralized enamel, forming fluorapatite (or fluoro-hydroxyapatite), a mineral structure that is inherently more resistant to subsequent acid attacks than the original hydroxyapatite.¹ This process can arrest or even reverse early, non-cavitated caries lesions (white spots).

3. Inhibition of Bacterial Metabolism: Fluoride can interfere with enzymatic processes (like enolase) in cariogenic bacteria, reducing their ability to produce acid and potentially inhibiting their growth.¹

The consensus emphasizes that frequent exposure to low concentrations of topical fluoride provides the most significant benefit.¹ Brushing twice daily with fluoride toothpaste increases salivary fluoride levels substantially for 1-2 hours, promoting remineralization.²² Standard over-the-counter (OTC) toothpastes in the US typically contain 1000-1500 parts per million (ppm) of fluoride, a concentration range proven effective in numerous clinical trials.¹ Higher concentrations (e.g., 2800 ppm, 5000 ppm) are available by prescription for individuals deemed at high risk for caries, offering potentially greater protection but also carrying an increased risk of dental fluorosis if ingested inappropriately.¹ While systemic fluoride ingested during tooth development (via optimally fluoridated water or supplements in fluoride-deficient areas) contributes by incorporating fluoride into the enamel structure, the continuous topical effect throughout life is now considered the most important mechanism for caries prevention.³ This distinction between topical action and systemic ingestion is fundamental to understanding both the benefits and the controversies surrounding fluoride use.

1.2 Understanding Overall Oral Health Beyond Cavities

Contemporary understanding of oral health extends beyond the singular focus on preventing cavities. The oral cavity hosts a complex and dynamic microbial ecosystem – the oral microbiome – comprising bacteria, fungi, archaea, and viruses.²⁹ In a state of balance (eubiosis), this microbiome plays a crucial role in maintaining health, acting as a protective barrier against exogenous pathogens and contributing to initial digestion processes.²⁹

However, this balance can be disrupted (dysbiosis) by various factors, including diet (particularly high sugar intake), poor oral hygiene, smoking, alcohol consumption, systemic diseases (like diabetes), and certain medications.²⁹ Dysbiosis allows opportunistic pathogens within the resident microbiota to proliferate, leading to common oral diseases such as dental caries (driven by acidogenic bacteria like Streptococcus mutans), gingivitis, periodontitis (linked to anaerobic bacteria like Porphyromonas gingivalis), oral candidiasis (fungal overgrowth), and halitosis.²⁹

Furthermore, growing evidence highlights the connection between the oral microbiome and systemic health, often referred to as the oral-systemic link.²⁹ Oral dysbiosis and associated inflammation (particularly from periodontitis) have been linked to an increased risk or exacerbation of various systemic conditions, including cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, rheumatoid arthritis, adverse pregnancy outcomes, inflammatory bowel disease, Alzheimer's disease, and certain cancers.²⁹ Mechanisms proposed include translocation of oral bacteria or their products into the bloodstream and systemic inflammation triggered by oral infections.

This broader perspective implies that interventions for oral health should ideally not only target specific pathogens (like S. mutans for caries) but also aim to support a balanced and resilient oral microbiome. Consequently, oral care products and practices are increasingly being evaluated for their impact on the overall microbial community structure and function.²⁹ Agents like fluoride ²⁷, hydroxyapatite ³³, xylitol ³⁵, probiotics ²⁹, and practices like oil pulling ³⁶ are being investigated not just for their direct anti-caries or anti-gingivitis effects but also for their potential to modulate the microbiome towards a healthier state. This holistic view resonates strongly with the health optimization philosophy prevalent in biohacking and rationalist communities.

1.3 Basis for Fluoride Concerns in Niche Communities

Despite the strong scientific consensus on fluoride's topical benefits for caries prevention, significant concerns and skepticism persist, particularly within health optimization, biohacking, and rationalist communities. While historical opposition to water fluoridation sometimes stemmed from political ideologies or conspiracy theories ³⁸, contemporary concerns voiced in these niche forums often focus on potential biological risks, reflecting a heightened sensitivity to potential toxicity and a desire for "natural" or minimally interventive health strategies.

A primary driver of concern is the potential for systemic toxicity from ingested fluoride.³⁹ Discussions often highlight the difference between the low fluoride levels in optimally fluoridated water (around 0.7 ppm in the US ⁴) and the much higher concentrations in toothpaste (1000-1500 ppm OTC, up to 5000 ppm prescription ¹). There is a valid concern about accidental ingestion, especially by young children who may swallow toothpaste.¹ This risk is the basis for recommendations to use only a smear (rice-grain size) of fluoride toothpaste for children under 3 and a pea-sized amount for ages 3-6.¹

Dental fluorosis, a condition characterized by changes in enamel appearance (from faint white lines to pitting) caused by excessive fluoride ingestion during the years of permanent tooth formation (birth to ~8 years), is a well-documented risk of overexposure.¹ While typically mild and cosmetic at exposure levels near optimal water fluoridation, it serves as a visible marker of systemic fluoride intake during development and fuels arguments for minimizing fluoride ingestion in children.

More controversially, concerns about neurotoxicity and potential impacts on IQ are frequently raised in these communities.⁵ These concerns often cite ecological or observational studies, primarily conducted in areas with naturally high water fluoride levels (significantly exceeding optimally fluoridated levels) or with methodological limitations. Critics argue these studies suffer from confounding factors (e.g., co-exposure to other environmental toxins like lead or arsenic, nutritional deficiencies), inadequate control for socioeconomic status, and difficulty establishing causality.⁴ Proponents of fluoride safety point to the lack of consistent evidence for neurotoxic effects at the low levels used in water fluoridation or from typical toothpaste use in populations studied over decades.²³ The ongoing debate surrounding the US National Toxicology Program's (NTP) report on fluoride neurotoxicity has further intensified these discussions.⁴¹

Other cited systemic concerns include potential accumulation in the pineal gland affecting melatonin production and sleep ³⁹, effects on bone health (skeletal fluorosis, though rare at optimal levels ³⁹), thyroid function, and reproductive health.⁴ However, robust evidence linking these issues specifically to optimal water fluoridation or typical topical toothpaste use in humans is generally considered weak or lacking by major health organizations.

Finally, a philosophical objection exists regarding the lack of individual consent in community water fluoridation, viewing it as a form of mass medication.⁴

Discussions on platforms like LessWrong ⁴⁰ and Hacker News ⁵ reflect these concerns, often referencing specific studies or the NTP report, but sometimes lacking critical appraisal of the study designs, exposure levels, and context. There's a tendency to adopt a precautionary principle, prioritizing the avoidance of potential, even poorly substantiated, risks over the established benefits of topical fluoride. This often involves conflating the potential risks associated with chronic, higher-dose systemic exposure (primarily from water or high natural sources) with the effects of intermittent, low-dose topical exposure from toothpaste, where the vast majority is expectorated rather than swallowed.

2. Alternative Approaches in Niche Communities

Driven by concerns about fluoride and a broader interest in optimizing health through natural or biocompatible means, niche communities actively explore and recommend various alternative ingredients and oral hygiene practices.

2.1 Prominent Ingredients and Practices

• Hydroxyapatite (HAP) and Nano-Hydroxyapatite (nHAp): This is arguably the most frequently discussed and favored fluoride alternative within these communities.¹⁵ Its appeal stems from being the primary mineral component of natural tooth enamel and bone, making it inherently biomimetic.⁷ Users value its potential to remineralize enamel and reduce sensitivity without the perceived risks of fluoride, particularly fluorosis in children.⁶ Both microcrystalline HAP and nano-sized particles (nHAp) are used in formulations, with nHAp believed by some to offer better penetration into enamel defects and dentinal tubules.⁸ Anecdotal reports on forums like Hacker News often describe positive experiences, such as reduced tooth sensitivity and a feeling of enamel protection.¹⁵ Brands frequently mentioned include Risewell, Davids, Hüppy, and Boka.⁴⁵ Health influencers like Ben Greenfield also discuss and endorse HAP/nHAp.⁴⁷

• Xylitol: This five-carbon sugar alcohol is recognized for its specific inhibitory effects on Streptococcus mutans, a key bacterium implicated in caries.³⁵ While often consumed as gum or mints to achieve therapeutic doses, there is interest in incorporating it into toothpaste.¹⁵ Some systematic reviews suggest a benefit, particularly when added to fluoride toothpaste.¹¹ However, users on platforms like Hacker News have noted the difficulty in finding toothpastes containing significant amounts of xylitol.⁵¹

• Theobromine: Derived from the cacao plant (the source of chocolate), theobromine is emerging as a novel "natural" alternative.⁵⁴ Preliminary research suggests it may enhance enamel crystal hardness and possess antimicrobial properties.¹² Its natural origin makes it appealing to those seeking non-fluoride options.

• Oral Probiotics: Aligning with the biohacking focus on microbiome optimization, oral probiotics are discussed as a way to support a healthy balance of bacteria in the mouth.²⁹ Specific strains, such as Streptococcus salivarius M18, are sometimes mentioned for their potential to displace pathogenic bacteria.⁴⁷ These are typically taken as supplements (lozenges, chewable tablets) rather than being a primary toothpaste ingredient, though probiotic toothpastes exist.

• Novamin (Calcium Sodium Phosphosilicate - CSPS / Bioactive Glass): Although technically not a "natural" alternative in the same vein as HAP or theobromine, Novamin generates significant interest in technically-minded communities like Hacker News.¹⁵ It is a type of bioactive glass known for its ability to release calcium and phosphate ions upon contact with saliva, forming a hydroxycarbonate apatite (HCA) layer that occludes dentinal tubules and potentially remineralizes enamel.⁵⁷ Users report substantial relief from dentin hypersensitivity.¹⁵ A major point of discussion is its limited availability in toothpaste formulations within the United States compared to other regions, leading users to import products or seek alternatives.¹⁵ Biomin, a related fluoridated bioactive glass technology, is also sometimes mentioned.¹⁵

• Oil Pulling: This traditional Ayurvedic practice involves swishing edible oil (commonly coconut, sesame, or sunflower oil) in the mouth for an extended period (e.g., 10-20 minutes) before spitting it out.³⁷ It is adopted by some in health-conscious communities as a natural method for improving oral hygiene, potentially reducing plaque, gingivitis, and halitosis.³⁷ Coconut oil is often preferred due to its high lauric acid content, which has known antimicrobial properties.³⁷

• Dietary Modifications: Underlying many discussions is the implicit or explicit recognition of diet's crucial role, particularly the detrimental effect of frequent sugar consumption.¹⁷ Rationalist approaches to health often incorporate dietary strategy as a fundamental component of oral health management alongside hygiene practices.¹⁶

2.2 Critiques of Conventional Toothpaste Beyond Fluoride

The search for alternatives is not solely driven by fluoride concerns. Other aspects of conventional toothpaste formulations are also subject to critique within these communities:

• Excipients and Additives: Concerns are raised about common ingredients like sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS), a surfactant known to cause irritation or canker sores in susceptible individuals. Other ingredients like artificial sweeteners, preservatives, dyes, and certain emulsifiers or thickeners are viewed as unnecessary or potentially disruptive to the oral microbiome or overall health.⁴⁶ There is a preference for "clean" formulations with minimal, recognizable ingredients.

• Microbiome Disruption: Some worry that broad-spectrum antimicrobial agents or harsh detergents in conventional toothpastes might negatively impact the beneficial bacteria necessary for oral health, contributing to dysbiosis.⁴⁶ This fuels interest in microbiome-sparing or actively supportive approaches like HAP (which primarily acts via anti-adhesion ³³) or probiotics.

• Perceived Ineffectiveness: Some individuals may turn to alternatives because they continue to experience dental issues (caries, sensitivity, gingivitis) despite using conventional fluoride toothpaste, leading them to question its efficacy for them and seek different solutions. This aligns with the self-experimentation ethos – if the standard approach isn't yielding desired results, try something else.

The movement towards alternative oral care products within these niche communities thus reflects a confluence of factors: specific anxieties about fluoride's systemic effects, a broader desire for products perceived as more natural, biocompatible, and microbiome-friendly, and a general skepticism towards mainstream industrial formulations coupled with a belief in personalized optimization.

3. Evaluating the Evidence: Fluoride Risks and Alternative Efficacy

A critical assessment requires evaluating both the validity of the concerns raised about fluoride and the scientific evidence supporting the efficacy and safety of the proposed alternatives.

3.1 Assessing Fluoride Risk Hypotheses

• Dental Fluorosis: This is an established, dose-dependent risk associated with excessive fluoride ingestion during the critical period of enamel formation (up to age 8).¹ The risk is effectively managed by controlling fluoride intake, primarily through recommending appropriate (smear or pea-sized) amounts of toothpaste for young children and monitoring fluoride levels in drinking water.¹ In its milder forms, fluorosis is primarily a cosmetic issue.²² Its existence underscores the importance of differentiating between topical application (where most fluoride is expectorated) and systemic ingestion.

• Systemic Toxicity and Neurodevelopmental Concerns: The hypothesis that fluoride exposure at levels typical of optimally fluoridated water (0.7 ppm) or standard toothpaste use causes significant systemic harm, particularly neurodevelopmental effects like reduced IQ, remains highly contentious.⁵ Studies cited by concerned groups often involve populations exposed to much higher fluoride levels (e.g., >2 ppm or significantly more in drinking water), frequently in regions with potential co-exposure to other environmental contaminants or nutritional deficiencies that act as confounders.⁴ Extrapolating findings from these high-exposure, often ecologically designed studies to predict harm from low-level, controlled exposures is scientifically problematic.⁵ Decades of experience with water fluoridation and widespread fluoride toothpaste use in numerous countries have not produced clear, population-level evidence of the alleged harms, such as widespread cognitive impairment.²³ While regulatory bodies continue to review the evidence (e.g., the NTP report ⁴¹), the current weight of scientific evidence from major health organizations does not support claims of significant neurotoxic risk from optimally fluoridated water or standard toothpaste use when used as directed. The debate is often characterized by a failure to critically evaluate study quality and context, particularly regarding dose and exposure routes.⁴

The distinction between the established topical benefits and the debated systemic risks is crucial. Concerns valid for high systemic intake (like fluorosis) do not automatically negate the proven benefits of topical application for caries prevention, where ingestion is minimal for most users past early childhood.

3.2 Scientific Evaluation of Key Alternatives

Evaluating alternatives requires assessing their efficacy against caries, their mechanisms of action, safety profiles, and the quality of the supporting evidence.

• Hydroxyapatite (HAP/nHAp):

• Efficacy: A growing body of evidence, including multiple systematic reviews and RCTs, supports the efficacy of HAP/nHAp in preventing caries.⁶ Several head-to-head trials have demonstrated non-inferiority to standard fluoride toothpastes (e.g., 1000-1450 ppm F) in preventing caries progression in diverse populations, including children, adolescents undergoing orthodontic treatment, and adults.⁶ Some studies even suggest potential advantages in specific situations, like remineralizing white spot lesions or exhibiting higher overall remineralization potential.⁶ It has also shown efficacy against root caries in vitro.⁶⁴

• Mechanism: HAP works biomimetically. Particles adhere to the enamel surface, filling microscopic defects and integrating into the tooth structure.⁸ They act as a source of calcium and phosphate ions, promoting remineralization, especially under acidic conditions.⁶ HAP can also buffer plaque pH and reduce the adhesion of bacteria to tooth surfaces.⁶ Nano-sized particles are thought to penetrate deeper into lesions and tubules.⁸

• Safety: Microcrystalline HAP is generally considered safe and biocompatible, being a natural component of teeth and bone.⁷ It does not pose a risk of dental fluorosis.⁶ However, nano-hydroxyapatite has faced scrutiny. The primary concern revolves around particle shape and potential toxicity. Regulatory bodies like the EU's Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS) have expressed concern about needle-shaped nHAp due to potential toxicity observed in some (often preliminary or methodologically flawed) animal or in vitro studies.⁹ Rod-shaped nHAp particles, which are typically used in oral care products ⁹, are generally viewed as safer. Recent SCCS opinions suggest rod-shaped nHAp is likely safe at typical concentrations (e.g., up to 10% in toothpaste) with specific characteristics (e.g., aspect ratio < 3), but also highlight the lack of definitive long-term human safety data.¹⁰ Questions remain about potential systemic absorption through oral tissues or local cellular effects, although some evidence suggests nHAp dissolves in stomach acid if ingested.¹⁰ More independent, long-term research is needed.¹⁸

• Evidence Quality: Moderate to strong for caries prevention efficacy, supported by multiple systematic reviews and RCTs.⁶ However, some reviews focusing specifically on nano-HAP have concluded the evidence is currently insufficient or of low quality due to study heterogeneity, risk of bias, and short follow-up periods.⁷⁰ The evidence for safety, particularly long-term effects of nHAp, is less mature than for efficacy.

• Xylitol:

• Efficacy: Evidence is mixed and often rated as low quality. A Cochrane review found low-quality evidence that adding 10% xylitol to fluoride toothpaste might reduce caries by about 13% in children over 2.5-3 years compared to fluoride alone.¹¹ Other meta-analyses pooling various delivery methods (gum, lozenges, toothpaste) show significant reductions in caries indices (DMF/dmf) compared to controls ³⁵ or an overall preventive fraction around 17-58% depending on the analysis.²⁰ Crucially, effectiveness appears highly dependent on dose (total 5-10 grams per day) and frequency (3-5 times per day), levels potentially difficult to achieve through toothpaste alone.¹⁹

• Mechanism: Xylitol is not readily metabolized by S. mutans, disrupting their energy production and leading to reduced acid production and potentially cell death.³⁵ It also reduces bacterial adherence to tooth surfaces.¹⁹

• Safety: Generally recognized as safe. The main side effect is gastrointestinal upset (gas, bloating, diarrhea) at high doses due to its osmotic effect in the gut.¹¹ A recent study questioned whether circulating xylitol levels always correlate with dietary intake, noting endogenous production, but the implications for oral health products are unclear.⁷⁶

• Evidence Quality: Generally considered low to very low for caries prevention, particularly for xylitol toothpaste as a standalone agent, due to inconsistent results, risk of bias in studies, and heterogeneity.¹¹

• Theobromine:

• Efficacy: Evidence is preliminary but promising. In vitro and animal studies suggest theobromine can enhance enamel microhardness and crystal size, potentially making enamel more resistant to acid.⁵⁴ A recent systematic review and meta-analysis of in vitro studies concluded that theobromine was as effective as fluoride in increasing enamel microhardness after demineralization.¹² One small clinical study found a theobromine toothpaste was effective in remineralizing early childhood caries lesions and also increased salivary pH and buffering capacity while decreasing S. mutans levels, comparable to a fluoride toothpaste.⁵⁶ Some in vitro studies suggest superior antimicrobial activity against certain cariogenic bacteria compared to low-fluoride children's toothpastes.⁵⁵ Another pilot study found similar antimicrobial effects against S. mutans and A. naeslundii compared to standard fluoride.⁷⁷

• Mechanism: Thought to promote the growth of larger, more stable apatite crystals in enamel.⁵⁴ May also bind calcium and phosphate ⁵⁴ and exhibit antimicrobial effects.⁵⁵

• Safety: As a naturally occurring compound in cocoa, it is generally considered safe at concentrations used in oral care products.⁷⁷

• Evidence Quality: Currently limited. Primarily based on in vitro studies, animal models, and small or preliminary human trials.⁵⁴ More robust, large-scale RCTs evaluating clinical caries outcomes are needed to confirm efficacy relative to fluoride or HAP.

• Oral Probiotics:

• Efficacy: The goal is to modulate the oral microbiome favorably.²⁹ However, systematic reviews consistently report conflicting results regarding clinical benefits for oral diseases, including caries.¹³ While some studies show positive effects on intermediate markers (like reducing S. mutans counts) or clinical parameters for gingivitis/periodontitis ¹³, evidence for preventing caries is weak or inconclusive. One RCT found that tested probiotics did not significantly alter the long-term stability of the supragingival microbiota in healthy individuals.⁷⁹

• Mechanism: Proposed mechanisms include competitive inhibition of pathogens, production of antimicrobial substances (bacteriocins), and modulation of the host immune response.²⁹

• Safety: Generally considered safe, as they are often derived from bacteria found in healthy individuals or fermented foods.³¹

• Evidence Quality: Highly variable and generally low for caries prevention. Major limitations include heterogeneity in study designs, probiotic strains used, delivery methods (lozenges, tablets, toothpaste, rinse), duration, sample sizes, and microbial analysis techniques (often relying on older methods like culturing or qPCR rather than comprehensive sequencing).¹³

• Oil Pulling:

• Efficacy: Primarily studied for effects on plaque accumulation and gingival health, rather than direct caries prevention or remineralization. Systematic reviews find limited evidence, generally of low or very low quality, suggesting potential benefits in reducing plaque scores, gingival inflammation (gingivitis), and overall oral bacterial load, including S. mutans.³⁷ Some studies suggest it may be comparable to chlorhexidine mouthwash for improving gingival health, but potentially less effective at reducing plaque.⁸² Coconut oil is frequently studied due to its lauric acid content.³⁷ One recent study using advanced sequencing suggested coconut oil pulling could favorably modulate the subgingival microbiome and reduce inflammatory markers in periodontitis patients.³⁶

• Mechanism: Believed to work through mechanical cleansing (swishing action), potential saponification/emulsification trapping bacteria in the oil, and possible antimicrobial/anti-inflammatory effects of certain oils (like lauric acid in coconut oil).³⁷

• Safety: Generally safe when performed correctly with edible oils. Aspiration of oil is a theoretical risk, especially for individuals with impaired swallowing reflexes.

• Evidence Quality: Consistently rated as low or very low in systematic reviews due to high risk of bias (especially performance bias due to difficulty in blinding), small sample sizes, short study durations, and heterogeneity in methods and outcomes.³⁷

• Other Remineralizing Agents:

• Novamin (CSPS/Bioactive Glass): Strong evidence supports its efficacy for reducing dentin hypersensitivity by occluding dentinal tubules.⁵⁷ Its mechanism involves releasing ions (Ca, P, Na, Si) and forming a hydroxycarbonate apatite (HCA) layer on the tooth surface.⁵⁷ Evidence specifically for remineralizing caries lesions is considered less robust than for sensitivity, with systematic reviews finding limited clinical evidence compared to fluoride.⁸⁷ However, some in vitro and in situ studies do show remineralization potential.⁵⁹

• CPP-ACP (Casein Phosphopeptide-Amorphous Calcium Phosphate / MI Paste): This milk-derived complex aims to deliver stabilized, bioavailable calcium and phosphate ions to the tooth surface.⁸⁸ Systematic reviews present mixed findings on its clinical efficacy for remineralizing white spot lesions, particularly when compared directly to fluoride monotherapy.⁸⁸ While generally found to be effective compared to placebo ⁸⁸, it is often not shown to be superior to fluoride alone.⁹⁰ Adding fluoride to the complex (CPP-ACPF, as in MI Paste Plus) may enhance its remineralizing effect, potentially making it comparable or slightly better than CPP-ACP alone in some studies, but still not consistently outperforming fluoride varnish or high-fluoride toothpaste.⁸⁹ Evidence quality varies across reviews and studies.

3.3 Impact on the Oral Microbiome

Understanding how these agents affect the broader oral ecosystem is crucial, moving beyond simple bactericidal action.

• Fluoride: While primarily acting on mineral balance, fluoride also exerts selective pressure on the microbiome. It inhibits acid production by many bacteria and can be more toxic to acidogenic/aciduric species like S. mutans at the low pH found in cariogenic plaque.¹ Some research suggests fluoride use can lead to shifts in the salivary microbiome, potentially enriching for health-associated bacteria like Bacteroides and reducing certain Firmicutes associated with caries.²⁷

• HAP/nHAp: HAP appears to have a more modulatory effect. Studies suggest it reduces bacterial adhesion to enamel surfaces, potentially by binding to bacteria or altering the surface properties, rather than killing them directly.³³ This anti-adherent property might favor a less pathogenic biofilm composition. Furthermore, by incorporating into plaque, HAP can act as a calcium and phosphate reservoir, buffering pH drops during acid attacks.³⁴

• Xylitol: Its action is more targeted, specifically inhibiting the metabolism and growth of S. mutans and related streptococci.¹⁹ Long-term use may select for xylitol-resistant S. mutans strains, which some studies suggest might be less virulent, though this requires further confirmation.⁷⁵

• Probiotics: The explicit goal is to alter the microbiome by introducing beneficial strains that can compete with pathogens for resources and adhesion sites, produce inhibitory substances, or modulate the host response.²⁹ However, achieving stable colonization and demonstrating consistent ecological shifts with clinical benefits remains challenging.¹³

• Oil Pulling: May reduce the overall bacterial load through mechanical removal and potential antimicrobial effects of the oil.³⁷ Some evidence suggests it can shift the balance away from specific periodontal pathogens.³⁶

The long-term ecological consequences of these different approaches are still being elucidated. Fluoride's inhibitory effects on acidogenic bacteria are relatively well-understood. HAP's anti-adhesion mechanism offers a different strategy, potentially less disruptive to the overall commensal microbiota. Xylitol targets a key cariogenic group, while probiotics and oil pulling represent broader attempts at ecological modulation with currently less predictable outcomes for caries prevention specifically.

Table 1: Comparative Analysis of Key Toothpaste Ingredients for Caries Prevention

Feature

Fluoride (e.g., NaF, SnF2)

Hydroxyapatite (Micro)

Nano-Hydroxyapatite (Rod-shaped)

Xylitol

Theobromine

Oral Probiotics (in products)

Primary Mechanism

Promotes Remineralization (Fluorapatite), Inhibits Demineralization, Inhibits Bacterial Enzymes ¹

Biomimetic Remineralization, Surface Integration, Ion Reservoir ⁶

Biomimetic Remineralization, Deeper Penetration, Tubule Occlusion ⁸

Inhibits S. mutans Metabolism & Adherence, Reduces Acid Production ³⁵

Enhances Enamel Crystallinity, Potential Remineralization & Antimicrobial ⁵⁴

Microbiome Modulation, Competitive Exclusion, Potential Inhibition ²⁹

Caries Prevention Efficacy (Clinical Evidence)

Strong, Well-Established ¹

Moderate-Strong, Non-inferior to F in several studies ⁶

Moderate-Strong, Non-inferior to F in several studies; Nano evidence debated ⁷

Low-Moderate (esp. as adjunct), Dose/Frequency dependent ¹¹

Emerging, Promising In Vitro/Pilot data ¹²

Inconclusive / Insufficient for caries prevention ¹³

Remineralization Potential

High ¹

High ⁶

High, potentially deeper than micro-HAP ⁸

Indirect (via reduced demin.) ³⁵

Moderate-High (in vitro) ¹²

None directly

Known Risks / Safety Concerns

Dental Fluorosis (if ingested excessively during development) ¹, Contested systemic concerns (IQ, etc.) ⁵

Generally considered safe ⁷

Nano-specific concerns: Particle shape (needle vs. rod), Long-term data lacking, potential systemic effects debated ⁹

GI Upset (high doses) ¹¹

Generally considered safe (natural compound) ⁷⁷

Generally safe (dietary supplement status) ³¹

Overall Evidence Strength (Caries Prevention)

High

Moderate

Moderate (efficacy), Low (long-term nano safety)

Low to Very Low (standalone in toothpaste) ¹¹

Low / Preliminary

Very Low / Inconclusive

Niche Community Endorsement

Low (due to concerns)

High ¹⁵

High ¹⁵

Medium (as adjunct) ¹⁵

Low (less known)

Medium (aligns with microbiome focus) ⁴⁷

Microbiome Impact

Inhibitory (esp. acidogenic bacteria), Selective ²⁷

Modulatory (Anti-adhesion), Buffering ³³

Modulatory (Anti-adhesion), Buffering ³³

Inhibitory (Specific to S. mutans) ³⁵

Potential Antimicrobial ⁵⁵

Modulatory (Introduces beneficial strains) ²⁹

4. Case Studies: Self-Experimentation in Practice

4.1 Introduction to Rationalist/Biohacker Self-Experimentation

Individuals within rationalist and biohacking communities often engage in systematic self-experimentation (n=1 trials) to optimize aspects of their health and performance, including oral hygiene. This approach typically involves defining clear goals (e.g., reduce cavities, improve gum health), identifying measurable metrics (e.g., dentist feedback, subjective sensitivity), implementing a specific intervention (e.g., switching toothpaste), tracking results over time, and critically evaluating the outcomes to inform future decisions.¹⁶ While valuable for personalized optimization, these experiments inherently suffer from limitations, including the lack of control groups, potential for bias (confirmation bias, placebo effect), confounding variables (uncontrolled changes in diet or other habits), and the inability to generalize findings to others. Nonetheless, examining hypothetical case studies based on common practices observed in these communities can illustrate how individuals might apply the information gathered in this report.

4.2 Case Study 1: Transition to Hydroxyapatite (HAP/nHAp) Toothpaste

• Scenario: An individual, influenced by discussions on forums like Hacker News ¹⁵ and concerns about potential long-term systemic fluoride effects possibly gleaned from controversial studies or reports ⁵, decides to eliminate fluoride from their oral care routine. Their research points to Hydroxyapatite (HAP) as the most promising fluoride-free alternative, attracted by its biomimetic nature (being the natural mineral of teeth ⁸) and clinical studies suggesting non-inferiority to fluoride for caries prevention.⁶ They select a toothpaste brand known to use HAP or nHAp, perhaps prioritizing one that specifies using rod-shaped nanoparticles based on safety discussions.⁹ Their primary goal is to maintain their current level of cavity prevention while eliminating fluoride intake from toothpaste. A secondary goal might be to reduce mild tooth sensitivity they occasionally experience.¹⁵

• Tracking and Outcomes: The individual maintains their existing brushing (twice daily) and flossing (daily) routine and continues regular six-month dental checkups. They diligently track feedback from their dentist regarding any new caries development, changes in existing restorations, plaque accumulation, and gingival health over a period of 18-24 months. They might also keep a simple log rating tooth sensitivity to cold stimuli on a weekly basis.

• Evaluation:

• If, after 18-24 months, dental checkups reveal no new cavities and stable oral health, and subjective sensitivity has decreased, the individual might conclude the transition was successful. The HAP toothpaste appears non-inferior to their previous fluoride toothpaste for caries prevention in their case, and beneficial for sensitivity.⁹

• If oral health remains stable but sensitivity does not improve, they might still consider the experiment a success regarding their primary goal (fluoride elimination without increased caries) but note the lack of sensitivity benefit.

• If new cavities develop at a rate higher than their baseline, they must critically assess the situation. While the HAP toothpaste could be less effective for them, other factors (changes in diet, stress, illness) could be responsible. This outcome highlights the limitations of n=1 experimentation – it's difficult to definitively attribute the change solely to the toothpaste. They might discuss reverting to fluoride, trying a different HAP formulation, or adding adjuncts like xylitol.

• Regardless of the outcome, the individual understands this is anecdotal evidence applicable only to them and cannot prove the general efficacy or safety of HAP toothpaste.

4.3 Case Study 2: Multi-Modal Unconventional Oral Hygiene Routine

• Scenario: Another individual, deeply embedded in health optimization culture, adopts a more complex, multi-pronged approach. They switch to an HAP toothpaste (similar rationale to Case 1), but also integrate several other practices discussed in niche communities or by influencers like Ben Greenfield.⁴⁷ This could include:

• Chewing xylitol gum or using xylitol mints after meals and snacks, aiming for the recommended therapeutic dose of 5-10g total per day, consumed 3-5 times ²⁰, to suppress S. mutans.

• Performing daily oil pulling with coconut oil for 15 minutes each morning before brushing ³⁷, aiming to reduce overall bacterial load and improve gingival health.

• Taking a daily oral probiotic supplement containing strains like S. salivarius M18 ⁴⁷, aiming to cultivate a beneficial oral microbiome.²⁹

• Maintaining meticulous brushing and flossing, possibly using an electric toothbrush based on evidence of superior plaque removal.¹⁶

• Tracking and Outcomes: This individual might track similar metrics as in Case 1 (caries incidence via dentist, subjective sensitivity). Given the focus on multiple modalities, they might also track gingival bleeding (e.g., using a simple bleeding index during flossing), subjective breath freshness, or even invest in commercial oral microbiome testing kits (though interpreting these results accurately remains challenging for consumers).

• Evaluation: Interpreting the results of this multi-modal approach is significantly more complex. If the individual experiences positive outcomes (e.g., no cavities, improved gum health, reduced sensitivity, fresher breath), it is impossible to determine which component(s) of the routine were responsible. Was it the HAP, the xylitol, the oil pulling, the probiotics, the improved mechanical cleaning, a synergistic effect, or simply the increased overall attention paid to oral health (Hawthorne effect)? Conversely, if problems arise, isolating the cause is equally difficult. This case illustrates the enthusiasm for combining multiple "optimized" practices often seen in these communities, but also the inherent difficulty in drawing valid conclusions about the efficacy of individual components from such complex, uncontrolled self-experiments.

These case studies demonstrate potential pathways for applying the information discussed but underscore the critical difference between personal experimentation for individual optimization and the rigorous, controlled studies required to establish generalizable scientific evidence for efficacy and safety.

5. Research Gaps and Evidence Limitations

While niche communities actively explore and experiment with alternatives to conventional fluoride toothpaste, significant gaps in scientific knowledge and limitations in the available evidence remain.

5.1 Unanswered Questions in Scientific Research

• Long-Term Efficacy of Alternatives: For most fluoride alternatives, including HAP/nHAp, theobromine, and probiotics, there is a scarcity of large-scale, long-term (e.g., >2-3 years) randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that use clinical caries incidence (e.g., DMFS/dmfs increment) as the primary outcome and directly compare them against standard fluoride toothpaste in diverse populations.¹⁸ Many existing studies are relatively short-term, involve small sample sizes, or rely on proxy outcomes like enamel microhardness changes or lesion appearance via fluorescence, which may not perfectly correlate with long-term cavity prevention.⁷⁰

• Nano-Hydroxyapatite Safety: Despite growing use, definitive long-term safety data for nHAp, particularly regarding different particle morphologies (needle vs. rod vs. other shapes) and sizes, is lacking.¹⁰ Key questions involve potential systemic absorption via oral mucosa or inhalation during brushing, cellular interactions, potential for accumulation in organs, and long-term toxicological or genotoxic effects.¹⁰ Independent, rigorously conducted studies adhering to established toxicological testing guidelines are needed to fully address the concerns raised by regulatory bodies and independent scientists.¹⁰

• Optimal Dosing and Delivery: For agents like xylitol and theobromine, the precise optimal concentrations within a toothpaste formulation, required frequency of use, and most effective delivery method (e.g., paste vs. rinse vs. gum) to achieve clinically significant caries prevention are not fully established.¹¹

• Microbiome Impact: While preliminary studies investigate the effects of various agents on the oral microbiome ²⁷, a deep understanding of the long-term ecological consequences is missing. How do these agents specifically alter the complex interactions within the biofilm? What constitutes an "optimal" microbiome profile for sustained oral health, and can these agents reliably achieve and maintain it? More research using advanced techniques like metagenomics and metatranscriptomics is needed.¹³

• Combination Therapies: The potential synergistic or antagonistic effects of combining multiple unconventional agents (e.g., HAP toothpaste + xylitol gum + oral probiotics) are largely unexplored in controlled studies.

5.2 Evaluating Niche Community Data and Anecdotal Evidence

Information gleaned from biohacking forums, rationalist discussions, blogs, and personal experiments provides valuable insights into user concerns, motivations, and real-world experiences, but must be interpreted with significant caution:

• Anecdotal Nature: Personal testimonials and success stories are highly susceptible to bias. The placebo effect, confirmation bias (seeing the results one expects), regression to the mean (natural fluctuations in health status), unreported confounding variables (e.g., simultaneous dietary changes), and reporting bias (sharing successes more readily than failures) can all influence reported outcomes.³⁷ Anecdotes cannot establish causality or efficacy.

• Limitations of Self-Experimentation (n=1): While potentially useful for individual optimization, n=1 studies lack statistical power and cannot control for external variables like controlled trials can.¹⁶ Results are not generalizable. Methodologies used in self-tracking can vary widely in rigor.

• Source Credibility and Bias: Information shared on forums and blogs may lack rigorous fact-checking or critical appraisal. Authors may have conflicts of interest (e.g., promoting specific products or affiliate links). Applying critical evaluation criteria (authority, accuracy, objectivity, currency, coverage) is essential but often difficult.

• Information Cascades: Certain ideas or concerns (e.g., fluoride neurotoxicity fears, specific benefits of HAP) can gain traction and spread rapidly within online communities, sometimes creating an impression of consensus that may not be fully supported by the underlying evidence.

5.3 Summary of Specific Safety Considerations

• Fluoride: The primary established risk is dental fluorosis from excessive ingestion during tooth development, managed by dose control.¹ Systemic toxicity concerns at typical exposure levels remain debated and lack conclusive evidence.⁴

• Nano-Hydroxyapatite: Particle shape is a key concern; needle-shaped nHAp is flagged by regulatory bodies due to potential toxicity, while rod-shaped is generally considered safer but requires more long-term data.⁹ Potential for systemic effects needs further clarification.

• Xylitol: High doses can cause dose-dependent gastrointestinal side effects.¹¹

• Other Alternatives: Generally considered safe based on current knowledge (e.g., theobromine as a food component, probiotics as supplements, edible oils for pulling), but lack the extensive long-term safety record of fluoride or the specific scrutiny applied to nanomaterials like nHAp.

In essence, the evidence supporting fluoride alternatives is developing but remains less comprehensive than the decades of research on fluoride. While HAP/nHAp shows considerable promise based on current efficacy data, the nano-specific safety questions require careful consideration and ongoing monitoring of research. Niche community enthusiasm and anecdotal reports can generate valuable hypotheses but should not be mistaken for scientifically validated proof of safety or efficacy.

6. Actionable Insights and Future Directions

Based on the analysis of established science and niche community perspectives, several considerations emerge for individuals seeking to optimize their oral care routine, particularly those aiming to minimize fluoride exposure.

6.1 Considerations for Personal Experimentation

For individuals inclined towards self-experimentation, a structured approach can help maximize learning while managing risks:

• Define Clear Goals and Metrics: Explicitly state the primary objective (e.g., maintain zero new cavities while using non-fluoride toothpaste, reduce sensitivity by 50%). Identify how progress will be measured: objective metrics like dentist's assessment of caries activity, plaque index, or gingival health are preferable to subjective ones, though subjective measures like sensitivity ratings can be tracked.¹⁶

• Adopt a Systematic Approach: Ideally, change only one major variable at a time (e.g., switch toothpaste but keep diet and flossing habits constant). Maintain consistency in brushing technique (consider an electric toothbrush for consistency ¹⁶), frequency, and dental visit schedule. Keep a detailed log of the intervention, timeline, and all measured outcomes.¹⁶

• Informed Product Selection:

• If choosing HAP/nHAp: Research brands to identify those using well-characterized particles, preferably specifying rod-shaped nHAp if using nano-formulations.⁹ Look for transparency regarding concentration and sourcing.⁴⁵ Consider brands with published studies supporting their formulations, if available.

• If incorporating Xylitol: Recognize that achieving therapeutic doses likely requires adjuncts like gum or mints consumed multiple times daily, aiming for 5-10g total.²⁰ Toothpaste alone may not suffice.

• Realistic Timeframe: Allow sufficient time for effects to manifest and be measured. Caries development is slow; evaluating changes typically requires monitoring across multiple dental checkup cycles (e.g., 12-24 months). Sensitivity changes might be noticeable sooner.

• Risk Management and Professional Consultation: Acknowledge the limitations of the evidence for the chosen alternative(s). Do not forgo regular professional dental examinations and cleanings, as these are crucial for early detection and prevention regardless of home care products. Discuss your chosen routine and rationale with a trusted dentist. While they may hold conventional views favoring fluoride, they can provide objective monitoring of clinical outcomes and professional advice tailored to your specific oral health status.

6.2 Worked Example: Transitioning to and Evaluating HAP Toothpaste

This example illustrates how an individual might apply these principles:

• Initial State: A user brushes twice daily with a standard 1450 ppm fluoride toothpaste, flosses daily, and attends dental checkups every 6 months. Their caries history is low, averaging 0-1 small new lesion per year. They experience mild, infrequent sensitivity to cold drinks. Their primary goal is to eliminate fluoride exposure from toothpaste due to concerns about potential long-term systemic effects ⁵, while maintaining or improving their current level of caries prevention. Reducing sensitivity is a secondary goal.

• Intervention: After researching alternatives, the user selects a toothpaste containing 10% microcrystalline Hydroxyapatite ⁷, based on evidence of non-inferiority to fluoride and its biomimetic nature. They switch to this toothpaste, maintaining all other aspects of their oral hygiene routine (brushing duration/frequency, flossing, diet, dental visit schedule) unchanged.

• Tracking Protocol (18-month duration):

• Dental Checkups: At 6, 12, and 18 months, the user records the dentist's findings regarding: number and status (new, arrested, progressing) of caries lesions, plaque index score, and assessment of gingival health (e.g., bleeding on probing).

• Sensitivity Log: Once per week, the user rates their tooth sensitivity to a standardized cold stimulus (e.g., drinking iced water) on a simple 1-5 scale (1=none, 5=severe).

• Potential Outcomes and Interpretation:

• Outcome A (Apparent Success): Across the 18 months, no new cavities are detected, existing restorations remain stable, plaque/gingival scores are unchanged or improved, and the average weekly sensitivity score decreases significantly. Interpretation: For this individual, the HAP toothpaste appears to be as effective as fluoride for caries prevention and superior for sensitivity relief. The primary goal of fluoride elimination is met without apparent detriment to oral health.

• Outcome B (Stable/Non-Inferior): No new cavities, stable restorations, stable plaque/gingival scores, but no significant change in sensitivity. Interpretation: The HAP toothpaste seems non-inferior for caries prevention in this case, meeting the primary goal. The secondary goal of sensitivity reduction was not achieved with this specific formulation.

• Outcome C (Potential Concern): One or two new small cavities are detected during the 18-month period (representing a potential increase over baseline), and sensitivity remains unchanged or worsens. Interpretation: This outcome raises questions. While it could indicate the HAP toothpaste is less effective for this individual, it could also be due to random variation, undetected changes in diet, or other factors. This underscores the ambiguity of n=1 results. The user should discuss this with their dentist, consider if other lifestyle factors changed, and potentially revert to fluoride, try a different HAP product (e.g., nHAp, different concentration), or add adjuncts.

This structured approach allows for personalized decision-making while acknowledging the inherent uncertainties of self-experimentation.

6.3 Areas Requiring Further Scientific Validation

To bridge the gap between niche community interest and evidence-based recommendations for the broader population, further high-quality research is essential:

1. Comparative Long-Term RCTs: Large-scale, multi-center RCTs with durations of at least 2-3 years are needed to directly compare the caries-preventive efficacy of HAP/nHAp toothpastes (using well-characterized materials) against standard fluoride toothpastes (e.g., 1450 ppm F) in diverse populations (including different age groups and caries risk levels). Clinical caries increment (DMFS/dmfs) should be the primary endpoint.

2. Rigorous nHAp Safety Studies: Independent, long-term toxicological studies adhering to international guidelines (e.g., OECD) are required to definitively assess the safety of various nHAp morphologies (especially rod-shaped) and sizes following realistic oral exposure scenarios (ingestion, mucosal contact, potential inhalation during brushing). These should investigate potential systemic absorption, biodistribution, accumulation, and chronic toxicity.

3. Clinical Validation of Theobromine: Well-designed RCTs are needed to evaluate the clinical efficacy of theobromine-containing toothpastes for caries prevention compared to both fluoride and placebo controls.

4. Standardized Probiotic Research: Future clinical trials on oral probiotics should utilize standardized protocols, well-defined strains and doses, appropriate control groups, longer follow-up periods, and advanced, validated methods (e.g., metagenomics, metatranscriptomics) for assessing microbiome changes and linking them to clinically relevant oral health outcomes (caries, periodontitis).¹³ Establishing core outcome sets for reporting would aid meta-analyses.

5. Oil Pulling and Caries: If oil pulling is to be considered relevant beyond gingival health, RCTs specifically designed to assess its impact on caries incidence or lesion progression/remineralization, compared to standard care, are needed.

Addressing these research gaps will provide a more robust evidence base to either validate the promising alternatives discussed within niche communities or clarify their limitations, ultimately enabling more confident and informed choices for optimizing long-term oral health. Personal experimentation can offer individual insights, but robust scientific validation remains the cornerstone for population-level recommendations.

Works cited

1. Fluoride in Toothpaste: Benefits, Recommendations, and Risks - Verywell Health, accessed April 10, 2025, https://www.verywellhealth.com/facts-about-fluoride-toothpaste-4587999

2. Fluoride toothpastes for preventing dental caries in children and adolescents - PMC, accessed April 10, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8439270/

3. The Role of Fluoride on Caries Prevention - StatPearls - NCBI Bookshelf, accessed April 10, 2025, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK587342/

4. Opinion: Anti-Fluoride Activists Lack Knowledge | The Lund Report, accessed April 10, 2025, https://www.thelundreport.org/content/opinion-anti-fluoride-activists-lack-knowledge

5. Talk to your dentist. They are experts in this field, and, unlike “random person... | Hacker News, accessed April 10, 2025, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43520928

6. Biomimetic hydroxyapatite and caries prevention: a systematic ..., accessed April 10, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8641555/

7. Caries-preventing effect of a hydroxyapatite-toothpaste in adults: a 18-month double-blinded randomized clinical trial - Frontiers, accessed April 10, 2025, https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/public-health/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2023.1199728/full

8. The use of hydroxyapatite toothpaste to prevent dental caries - PMC, accessed April 10, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8930857/

9. Is Nano Hydroxyapatite Safe? - Santa Teresa Smiles, accessed April 10, 2025, https://stsmiles.com/blog/is-nano-hydroxyapatite-safe/

10. Is Nano-Hydroxyapatite Safe? What You Need to Know About the Remineralizing Ingredient in Your Child's Toothpaste - mama rissa, accessed April 10, 2025, https://mamarissa.com/is-nano-hydroxyapatite-safe-what-you-need-to-know-about-the-remineralizing-ingredient-in-your-childs-toothpaste/

11. Xylitol‐containing products for preventing dental caries in children ..., accessed April 10, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9345289/

12. Theobromine for Remineralization of White Spot Lesions on Dental ..., accessed April 10, 2025, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38987932/

13. Effect of Probiotic Supplements on the Oral Microbiota—A Narrative Review - PMC, accessed April 10, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11124442/

14. The Benefits of Probiotics on Oral Health: Systematic Review of the Literature - PubMed, accessed April 10, 2025, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37765121/

15. It's so sad that most dentists optimise for billable revenue, even at ..., accessed April 10, 2025, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26642987

16. Rational Toothpaste: A Case Study - LessWrong, accessed April 10, 2025, https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/NHuLAS3oKZWr2X9hP/rational-toothpaste-a-case-study

17. But you will brush your teeth anyway, and then you apply fluoride topically. It - Hacker News, accessed April 10, 2025, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43522868

18. Hydroxyapatite for remineralizing teeth — has it been proven safe? [Up - Akamai Basics, accessed April 10, 2025, https://www.akamaibasics.com/blogs/learn-more/our-thoughts-on-hydroxyapatite-for-remineralizing-teeth

19. Meta-analysis on the Effectiveness of Xylitol in Caries Prevention - PMC - PubMed Central, accessed April 10, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9022379/

20. Meta-analysis on the Effectiveness of Xylitol in Caries Prevention - ResearchGate, accessed April 10, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/358368761_Meta-analysis_on_the_Effectiveness_of_Xylitol_in_Caries_Prevention

21. Biomimetic hydroxyapatite and caries prevention: a systematic review and meta-analysis, accessed April 10, 2025, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34925515/

22. Fluoride: Topical and Systemic Supplements - American Dental Association, accessed April 10, 2025, https://www.ada.org/resources/ada-library/oral-health-topics/fluoride-topical-and-systemic-supplements

23. Recommendations for Using Fluoride to Prevent and Control Dental Caries in the United States - CDC, accessed April 10, 2025, https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5014a1.htm

24. Fluoride Use in Caries Prevention in the Primary Care Setting | Pediatrics - AAP Publications, accessed April 10, 2025, https://publications.aap.org/pediatrics/article/146/6/e2020034637/33536/Fluoride-Use-in-Caries-Prevention-in-the-Primary

25. Fluoride Therapy - AAPD, accessed April 10, 2025, https://www.aapd.org/media/Policies_Guidelines/BP_FluorideTherapy.pdf

26. Fluoride: Uses, Benefits & Side Effects - Cleveland Clinic, accessed April 10, 2025, https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/treatments/11195-fluoride

27. Effects of topical fluoride application on oral microbiota in young ..., accessed April 10, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10028198/

28. Topical Fluoride Clinical Practice Guideline - American Dental Association, accessed April 10, 2025, https://www.ada.org/resources/research/science-and-research-institute/evidence-based-dental-research/topical-fluoride-clinical-practice-guideline

29. Oral Microbiome: A Review of Its Impact on Oral and Systemic Health - PubMed Central, accessed April 10, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11434369/

30. The Evolving Microbiome of Dental Caries - PMC - National Institutes of Health (NIH), accessed April 10, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10819217/

31. Clinical Implications of Probiotics in Oral and Periodontal Health: A Comprehensive Review - PMC - PubMed Central, accessed April 10, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10816831/

32. Manipulating the diseased oral microbiome: the power of probiotics and prebiotics - PMC - PubMed Central, accessed April 10, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10833113/

33. Hydroxyapatite as Remineralization Agent for Children's Dental Care - Frontiers, accessed April 10, 2025, https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/dental-medicine/articles/10.3389/fdmed.2022.859560/full

34. In Vivo Effects of a Hydroxyapatite-Based Oral Care Gel on the ..., accessed April 10, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7274817/

35. Xylitol in preventing dental caries: A systematic review and meta-analyses - PMC, accessed April 10, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5320817/

36. Anti-inflammatory and antimicrobial efficacy of coconut oil for periodontal pathogens: a triple-blind randomized clinical trial, accessed April 10, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11909057/

37. The effect of oil pulling with coconut oil to improve dental hygiene ..., accessed April 10, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7475120/

38. Opposition to water fluoridation - Wikipedia, accessed April 10, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opposition_to_water_fluoridation

39. The F Word - From Toothpaste to Tap Water: Is Fluoride Friend or Foe? | Semidey Dental, Davie FL, accessed April 10, 2025, https://www.semideydental.com/the-f-word-from-toothpaste-to-tap-water-is-fluoride-friend-or-foe/

40. Experiences in applying "The Biodeterminist's Guide to Parenting" - LessWrong, accessed April 10, 2025, https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/PAYMMgPi2L3MPP967/experiences-in-applying-the-biodeterminist-s-guide-to-1

41. Health officials delayed report linking fluoride to brain harm - Hacker News, accessed April 10, 2025, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36106925

42. Fluoride in our drinking water may not be as useful as it used to be | Hacker News, accessed April 10, 2025, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41757346

43. A Great Public Health Conspiracy? | by Will Koehrsen | TDS Archive - Medium, accessed April 10, 2025, https://medium.com/data-science/a-great-public-health-conspiracy-73f7ac6fb4e0

44. The use of hydroxyapatite toothpaste to prevent dental caries (2021 ..., accessed April 10, 2025, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43451534

45. Deep Cuts: Hydroxyapatite Toothpaste - Beauty Heroes, accessed April 10, 2025, https://www.beauty-heroes.com/blog/the-best-hydroxyapatite-toothpastes/

46. Understanding Glycerin in Toothpaste and Oral Care Products - TikTok, accessed April 10, 2025,

47. Listen to Boundless Life podcast - Deezer, accessed April 10, 2025, https://www.deezer.com/us/show/16379

48. Is Hydroxyapatite Safe? Uncovering the Truth in 2025 - Living Well with Dr. Michelle, accessed April 10, 2025, https://livingwellwithdrmichelle.com/is-hydroxyapatite-safe/

49. Focusaid Energy Blend - Brain Fuel with Nootropics & Kuwait | Ubuy, accessed April 10, 2025, https://www.a.ubuy.com.kw/en/product/6O9WF8-focusaid-energy-blend-nootropics-drink-for-brain-fuel-alpha-gpc-gaba-b-complex-yerba-mate-green-tea-100-clean-100mg-natural-caffeine-12-oz-can?st=es

50. Podcast Boundless Life - Apple Podcasts, accessed April 10, 2025,

51. *A lot* of toothpastes and mouthwashes? Any that you can find in local stores? I... | Hacker News, accessed April 10, 2025, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23344709

52. Meta-analysis on the Effectiveness of Xylitol in Caries Prevention - PubMed, accessed April 10, 2025, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35462747/

53. Xylitol in preventing dental caries: A systematic review and meta-analyses - PubMed, accessed April 10, 2025, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28250669/

54. Caries Preventive Effects of Theobromine Containing Toothpaste on Early Childhood Caries: Preliminary Results - PMC - PubMed Central, accessed April 10, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8033621/

55. Effect of theobromine in antimicrobial activity: An in vitro study - PMC, accessed April 10, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6364351/

56. Caries Preventive Effects of Theobromine Containing Toothpaste on Early Childhood Caries: Preliminary Results - PubMed, accessed April 10, 2025, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33867534/

57. Comparison of Clinical Efficacy of Pro-Argin and NovaMin Toothpastes in Relieving Dentin Hypersensitivity: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis, accessed April 10, 2025, https://d-nb.info/1290163812/34

58. Is there evidence for Novamin application in remineralization?: A Systematic review - PMC, accessed April 10, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7068624/

59. Mechanisms of Bioactive Glass on Caries Management: A Review - PMC, accessed April 10, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6947261/

60. Effect Of Bioactive Glass on Dentin Hypersensitivity – A Systematic Review - Journal of Population Therapeutics and Clinical Pharmacology, accessed April 10, 2025, https://jptcp.com/index.php/jptcp/article/download/2035/2088/5940

61. Comparative Analysis of Application of Fluoride Bioactive Glass and Sodium Fluoride Toothpastes for Remineralization of Primary Tooth Enamel Lesions - PMC, accessed April 10, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11940512/

62. Clinical evidence of caries prevention by hydroxyapatite: An ..., accessed April 10, 2025, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39471896/

63. Biomimetic hydroxyapatite and caries prevention: a systematic review and meta-analysis, accessed April 10, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/356038943_Biomimetic_hydroxyapatite_and_caries_prevention_a_systematic_review_and_meta-analysis

64. The Potential of Hydroxyapatite Toothpaste to Prevent Root Caries: A pH-Cycling Study, accessed April 10, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8312331/

65. Nanohydroxyapatite in dentistry: A comprehensive review - PMC, accessed April 10, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10562112/

66. Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety SCCS - Public Health - European Commission, accessed April 10, 2025, https://health.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2022-08/sccs_o_246.pdf

67. Nano-Hydroxyapatite Varnish: Does Research Support Caries Prevention Efficacy and Safety? - Today's RDH, accessed April 10, 2025, https://www.todaysrdh.com/nano-hydroxyapatite-varnish-does-research-support-caries-prevention-efficacy-and-safety/

68. Cytotoxicity of hydroxyapatite nanoparticles is shape and cell dependent - ResearchGate, accessed April 10, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/221893686_Cytotoxicity_of_hydroxyapatite_nanoparticles_is_shape_and_cell_dependent

69. Safety Assessment of Nano-Hydroxyapatite as an Oral Care Ingredient according to the EU Cosmetics Regulation - MDPI, accessed April 10, 2025, https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9284/5/3/53

70. Efficacy of nano-hydroxyapatite on caries prevention—a systematic ..., accessed April 10, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8979882/

71. Efficacy of nano-hydroxyapatite on caries prevention-a systematic review and meta-analysis, accessed April 10, 2025, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35103837/

72. (PDF) Efficacy of nano-hydroxyapatite on caries prevention—a systematic review and meta-analysis - ResearchGate, accessed April 10, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/358274413_Efficacy_of_nano-hydroxyapatite_on_caries_prevention-a_systematic_review_and_meta-analysis

73. Xylitol-containing products for preventing dental caries in children and adults - PubMed, accessed April 10, 2025, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25809586/

74. Xylitol in preventing dental caries: A systematic review and meta‑analyses - ResearchGate, accessed April 10, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/310673677_Xylitol_in_preventing_dental_caries_A_systematic_review_and_meta-analyses

75. Effectiveness of Xylitol in Reducing Dental Caries in Children - AAPD, accessed April 10, 2025, https://www.aapd.org/assets/1/7/103-10.pdf

76. And Now Xylitol | Hacker News, accessed April 10, 2025, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40790214

77. The antimicrobial activity of theobromine against cariogenic microbes: an in vitro pilot study, accessed April 10, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10834536/

78. Association of dietary intake of theobromine with periodontitis: NHANES 2009–2014 - PMC, accessed April 10, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11921530/

79. Probiotics Do Not Alter the Long-Term Stability of the Supragingival Microbiota in Healthy Subjects: A Randomized Controlled Trial, accessed April 10, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8064340/

80. The effect of oil pulling with coconut oil to improve dental hygiene and oral health: A systematic review - PubMed, accessed April 10, 2025, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32923724/

81. Effect of oil pulling in promoting oro dental hygiene: A systematic review of randomized clinical trials - PubMed, accessed April 10, 2025, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27261981/

82. The effect of oil pulling in comparison with chlorhexidine and other mouthwash interventions in promoting oral health: A systematic review and meta-analysis - PubMed, accessed April 10, 2025, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37635453/

83. Effectiveness of Oil Pulling for Improving Oral Health: A Meta-Analysis - PubMed, accessed April 10, 2025, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36292438/

84. The Efficacy of Selected Desensitizing OTC Products: A Systematic Review - PMC, accessed April 10, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4005032/

85. Bioactive Glass Nanoparticles (NovaMin®) for Applications in Dentistry – - IOSR Journal, accessed April 10, 2025, https://www.iosrjournals.org/iosr-jdms/papers/Vol14-issue8/Version-4/G014843035.pdf

86. (PDF) Evaluation of Bioactive Glass Treatment for Dentin Hypersensitivity: A Systematic Review - ResearchGate, accessed April 10, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/372388164_Evaluation_of_Bioactive_Glass_Treatment_for_Dentin_Hypersensitivity_A_Systematic_Review

87. (PDF) Is there Evidence for Novamin application in Remineralization: A Systematic Review, accessed April 10, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/338747912_Is_there_Evidence_for_Novamin_application_in_Remineralization_A_Systematic_Review

88. Evaluation of the efficacy of casein phosphopeptide-amorphous calcium phosphate on remineralization of white spot lesions in vitro and clinical research: a systematic review and meta-analysis, accessed April 10, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6937959/

89. Efficacy of CPP-ACP and CPP-ACPF for Prevention and Remineralization of White Spot Lesions in Orthodontic Patients: a Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Clinical Trials - PMC, accessed April 10, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6853720/

90. Efficiency of casein phosphopeptide amorphous calcium phosphate versus topical fluorides on remineralizing early enamel carious lesions – A systematic review and meta analysis - PMC, accessed April 10, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11056415/

91. Efficacy of fluorides and CPP-ACP vs fluorides monotherapy on early caries lesions: A systematic review and meta-analysis - PubMed Central, accessed April 10, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5927405/

92. Long-term remineralizing effect of MI Paste Plus on regression of early caries after orthodontic fixed appliance treatment: a 12-month follow-up randomized controlled trial - PubMed Central, accessed April 10, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6160597/

93. Efficacy of casein phosphopeptide-amorphous calcium phosphate varnish in remineralizing white spot lesions: A systematic review and meta-analysis - PMC - PubMed Central, accessed April 10, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9338355/

94. (PDF) Efficacy of CPP-ACP and CPP-ACPF for Prevention and Remineralization of White Spot Lesions in Orthodontic Patients: a Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Clinical Trials - ResearchGate, accessed April 10, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/334548943_Efficacy_of_CPP-ACP_and_CPP-ACPF_for_Prevention_and_Remineralization_of_White_Spot_Lesions_in_Orthodontic_Patients_a_Systematic_Review_of_Randomized_Controlled_Clinical_Trials

95. Efficacy of CPP-ACP and CPP-ACPF for Prevention and Remineralization of White Spot Lesions in Orthodontic Patients: a Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Clinical Trials - PubMed, accessed April 10, 2025, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31762578/

96. Effectiveness of casein phosphopeptide‐amorphous calcium phosphate‐containing products in the prevention and treatment of white spot lesions in orthodontic patients: A systematic review | Request PDF - ResearchGate, accessed April 10, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330623231_Effectiveness_of_casein_phosphopeptide-amorphous_calcium_phosphate-containing_products_in_the_prevention_and_treatment_of_white_spot_lesions_in_orthodontic_patients_A_systematic_review

97. Analysis of Dental Enamel Remineralization: A Systematic Review of Technique Comparisons - MDPI, accessed April 10, 2025, https://www.mdpi.com/2306-5354/10/4/472

98. Focus on rationality - LessWrong, accessed April 10, 2025, https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/bBFLpfKCgndBw9iGp/focus-on-rationality