INGREDIENT RESEARCH / CLAIM SUBSTANTIATION AND CUSTOMER RESEARCH TRIALS - CHARCOAL TEETH POWDER
We have carried out a qualitative analysis from our customers by open ended questionnaire and sampled 90 people of varying age, sex and lifestyles. These are the results we have collated:
94% of customers surveyed found that their teeth were noticeably whiter upon using the teeth powder on the first use.
93% of users found there to be less plaque on teeth lining after using for 1 week
98% of these surveyed reported a cleaner feeling mouth
albeit customers reported the product to be a little bit messy to use; the initial results were very good with 78% of people feeding back to us that they have recommended the product to other people.
‘’Factors Behind Tooth Wear
Tooth wear is a process resulting from three primary factors-abrasion (from the interaction of teeth with other materials); attrition (from tooth-to-tooth contact); and erosion (wear after teeth come into contact with environmental or dietary acids) (see Figures 2-5). In addition, numerous behaviors and health factors contribute to the process of tooth wear, including, but not limited to: a diet high in acidic beverages and foods, bruxism, aggressive or improper tooth brushing, low pH of the oral cavity (acid reflux, GI disorders, bulimia nervosa) and oral hygiene habits.
Relative to these factors, tooth brushing with abrasive-containing toothpaste by itself causes minimal wear. In one published survey of 100 consecutive cases of problematic tooth wear referrals, detailed histories were taken of each case to determine the etiology of tooth wear. Fifty-eight percent of cases were attributed to erosion alone or erosion combined with another etiology.
No cases could be attributed to abrasion alone.’’ 9. Shellis RP, Addy M. (2014) The interactions between attrition, abrasion and erosion in tooth wear. In: Lussi A, Ganss E (eds): Erosive Tooth Wear. Monogr Oral Sci. Basel, Karger 25:32-45.
Qualitative Study: Claim – ‘Safe on Enamel’
In order to keep the abrasiveness of our teeth powder to a level which is considered safe yet still effective we do not use pure activate charcoal from Coconut shells, we mix it with other powders (Calcium Carbonate, Bentonite Clay, Calcium Carbonate, Ginger, Peppermint Powder which are all considered safe to use on enamel, The charcoal only makes up 20% of the product quantity so only a small amount is used per time – the pot lasts around 100 uses so per use a person will be using around 0.5 of a gram of charcoal. This also lowers the abrasiveness of the product. We also abide by the RDA GUIDE LINK:
https://www.ada.org/en/member-center/oral-health-topics/toothpastes (RDA- Relative Dentin Abrasiveness). This is a guide to measure abrasiveness for all FDA approved dental products and the FDA recommends a score of 200 or below. Activated charcoal powder scores about a 70 to 90 on the RDA scale while most whitening toothpastes score between 100 to 200 RDA so our teeth powder is better for teeth in terms of abrasively. When used in moderation and gently on teeth, the powder is fine and extremely soft and goes around the teeth to absorb plaque binding to everything in its path—stains, tartar, bacteria, viruses. We do not encourage rough, strong or aggressive brushing.
.
Study 1:
The Effect of a Charcoal-based Powder for Enamel Dental Bleaching MC Franco; JLS Uehara; BM Meroni; GS Zuttion; MS Cenci Oper Dent (2020) 45 (6): 618–623.
SUMMARY
Charcoal-based dentifrices for dental whitening are a novelty in the market. Manufacturers claim that such charcoal-based products have whitening, remineralization, antimicrobial, and antifungal properties of charcoal in such products. However, there is no substantial scientific evidence for these claims. This laboratory randomized study was designed to evaluate the whitening properties of a charcoal-based toothpowder. A total of 45 bovine dental enamel discs were randomly distributed into three groups (n=15): group 1, mechanical brushing with a 1450-ppm F toothpaste (control group); group 2, mechanical brushing with an activated charcoal-based powder; group 3, bleaching per the standard protocol using 10% carbamide peroxide. The surface roughness and color of each specimen were analyzed at baseline and after 14 days of experiment. The surface of one randomly selected specimen from each group was examined using a scanning electron microscope (SEM). The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare groups at a significance level of 5%. Only group 3 promoted a statistically significant effect on ΔE compared with groups 1 and 2 (p<0.001 and p=0.003, respectively). No statistically significant difference was found between groups for surface roughness (p>0.05). SEM revealed a more irregular surface in group 1 specimens compared with group 2 and 3 specimens. The charcoal-based powder did not seem to have any bleaching effect.
Study 2:
In vitro abrasivity and chemical properties of charcoal-containing dentifrices
Foteini Machla , Aida Mulic , Ellen Bruzell , Håkon Valen & Ida Sofia Refsholt Stenhagen
Pages 167-174 | Received 06 Jul 2020, Accepted 13 Oct 2020, Published online: 03 Nov 2020
Objective
Charcoal-containing dentifrices are gaining popularity, but scientific information on their effect on oral health is scarce. This study investigated properties of dentifrices that may affect dentine abrasivity, as well as their ability to adsorb fluoride, their pH and the presence of harmful substances.
Materials and methods
The dentifrices NAO and COCO were subjected to the following analyses: abrasivity, expressed as mean abraded depth and relative dentin abrasivity (RDA), and surface roughness of extracted human molars (n = 30) after simulated brushing; fluoride adsorption measured as concentration change; pH measurements; detection of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons by gas chromatography–mass spectrometry. The products were compared to a reference dentifrice (Colgate® MaxWhite), positive controls (ISO dentifrice slurry, activated charcoal for laboratory use) and a negative control (distilled water).
Results
The mean abraded depths of NAO and COCO were not different (p > .05), but higher than the reference dentifrice and the negative control (p < .05). The RDA values of NAO, COCO and the ISO dentifrice slurry were higher than the reference dentifrice value (p < .05) by up to 10 times. The dentine surface roughness was higher after brushing with NAO, COCO and ISO dentifrice slurry compared to distilled water (p < .05). No change in mean adsorbed fluoride concentration was observed after 24 h (p > .05). Both NAO and COCO were alkaline (pH > 7). Analysis of NAO revealed the presence of naphthalene (112.8 ± 2.0 ng/mL).
Conclusion
The charcoal-containing dentifrices were abrasive within acceptable limits set by ISO and did not adsorb fluoride. The presence of naphthalene in one product is a cause for concern.
Study 3:
Hancocks SJ. (2014) Stabilised stannous fluoride and dental erosion. Int Dent J. 64:1-
In a recent paper that discussed clinical and experimental findings regarding the interactions between attrition, abrasion and erosion in tooth wear, the authors stated, "It has been concluded that normal toothbrushing habits with toothpastes that conform with the ISO standard will, in a lifetime's use, cause virtually no wear of enamel and clinically insignificant abrasion of dentine."
References
- Dörfer CE. (2010) Abrasivity of dentifrices from a clinical perspective. J Clin Dent. 21 (Suppl): S4.
- John S, White DJ. (2015) History of the development of abrasivity limits for dentifrices. J Clin Dent. 26 (2): 50-54.
- Hefferren J. (2010). Critical points in the evolution of laboratory methods to measure the functionality of toothpastes. J Clin Dent. 21 (Suppl): S6-S10.
- Hitchin PC, Robinson HBG. (1948) How abrasive need a dentifrice be? J Dent Res. 27;501-506.Hefferren JJ. (1976) A laboratory method for assessment of dentifrice abrasivity. J Dent Res. 55 (4): 563-73.
- Saxton CA, Cowell CR. (1981) Clinical investigation of the effects of dentifrices on dentin wear at the cementoenamel junction. J Am Dent Assoc.102 (1):38-43.
- Volpe AR, Mooney R, Zumbrunnen C, Stahl D, Goldman HM. (1975) A long term clinical study evaluating the effect of two dentifrices on oral tissues. J Periodontol. 46 (2):113-8.
- González-Cabezas C. (2010) Determination of the abrasivity of dentifrices on human dentin using the radioactive (also known as relative) dentin abrasion (RDA) method. J Clin Dent. 21 (Suppl): S9.
- Smith BG, Knight JK. A comparison of patterns of tooth wear with aetiological factors. Br Dent J. 1984 Jul 7;157(1):16-9.
- Shellis RP, Addy M. (2014) The interactions between attrition, abrasion and erosion in tooth wear. In: Lussi A, Ganss E (eds): Erosive Tooth Wear. Monogr Oral Sci. Basel, Karger 25:32-45.
- Hancocks SJ. (2014) Stabilised stannous fluoride and dental erosion. Int Dent J. 64:1-50.
- Carvalho TS, Colon P, Ganss C, et al. (2015) Consensus report of the European Federation of Conservative Dentistry: erosive tooth wear-diagnosis and management Clin Oral Inv. 19, (7): 1557-1561.
- http://www.ada.org/en/member-center/oral-health-topics/toothpastes