Best Microplastic-Free Toothpaste 2026: 18 Pastes Checked

What's in the big brands

Inactive ingredients as each maker lists them (or, where the brand site shows none, the US government's DailyMed label archive), checked on 21 September 2026. Formulas change, so check the pack.

Brand deep dives: Colgate, Crest and Sensodyne. Nearly every paste, polymer-free or not, uses cellulose gum, xanthan gum or carrageenan as a thickener. Those are natural or modified-natural polymers, not plastics.

The polymer names to know

More on each: PEG, carbomer and the 10 worst microplastic ingredients. Whether a dissolved polymer counts as a “microplastic” depends on who is defining it. The EU restriction covers only solid particles, while the Plastic Soup Foundation counts liquid and water-soluble polymers too.

Why the beads went but the polymers stayed

On 18 December 2015 Congress passed the Microbead-Free Waters Act. It defines a microbead as a solid plastic particle under five millimetres intended to exfoliate or cleanse, and says in so many words that rinse-off cosmetics include toothpaste. Cosmetic-only pastes had to stop being made by 1 July 2017 and sold by 1 July 2018. Fluoride toothpaste is legally an over-the-counter drug, so its deadlines were a year later: 1 July 2018 for manufacture and 1 July 2019 for sale.

The Act is narrower than most people assume. It defines a microbead by its job, so a polymer that thickens or holds moisture is not one. It covers only rinse-off products. And it covers only solid particles, which leaves out the dissolved PEGs and carbomers still found in some pastes.

England banned microbeads from rinse-off products in 2018 (manufacture from 9 January, sale from 19 June), with no test of what the particle is for. The EU restriction, Regulation 2023/2055, came into force on 17 October 2023 and banned microbeads immediately, with other uses phased in until 2035. It covers only solid, water-insoluble particles, so water-soluble polymers are outside it. In the US, California banned rinse-off microbeads from sale from 2020 (AB 888); a 2025 bill to extend that to leave-on products and glitter was vetoed.

The broader figure you may have seen, that 87% of products contain microplastics, comes from a 2022 Plastic Soup Foundation analysis of 7,704 products from ten best-selling European cosmetics brands, including Oral-B. It counted liquid and water-soluble polymers, and it was not a toothpaste study.

Has anyone found plastic particles in toothpaste?

A few studies have looked, and they disagree. A 2026 study of personal-care products sold in Türkiye found no microplastics in the toothpastes; the bead-like particles were silica or cellulose. A 2019 study of 20 pastes bought in Istanbul found polyethylene in 20% of them, at 0.4–1% by weight. Studies of pastes from India (2022, 2025) and China (2025) reported polyethylene, polypropylene and other polymers, with methods that vary. None reports particles per gram for US brands. The same 2025 Chinese study found that toothbrush wear released far more particles than the paste; see do toothbrushes shed microplastics.

Recommended polymer-free toothpastes

Every pick below lists no synthetic polymers on the maker's own ingredient list. Prices are the brand's list price on 21 September 2026.

Children's toothpaste

Two of the three big-brand kids' pastes we checked list a synthetic polymer: Colgate Kids (PEG-12) and Crest Kids (carbomer). Tom's of Maine Kids Silly Strawberry and all three hello kids pastes we checked (fluoride and fluoride-free) list none; hello's “sparkle” paste gets its shimmer from mica, not plastic glitter. Ask your dentist which fluoride strength suits your child's age.

The tube

Most tubes are plastic. Tom's of Maine used aluminium from the mid-1970s, switched to a plastic laminate in 2011, and since 2019 uses a recyclable #2 HDPE tube; hello uses the same kind. RiseWell's tube is LDPE. Davids is the exception among tubes: aluminium with a food-grade liner, so the paste touches the liner rather than bare metal. For no tube at all, Bite and Unpaste tablets come in a glass jar or a paper pouch.

Whether tubes shed plastic into the paste has not been studied: we found no published research on it. Packaging choice is a waste question more than an exposure one.

Hydroxyapatite vs fluoride: what the evidence says

Hydroxyapatite is the mineral tooth enamel is made of. The first hydroxyapatite toothpaste launched in Japan in 1980; nano-sized particles came in 2003. Two randomised trials compared it with fluoride for new cavities. In children, a microcrystalline hydroxyapatite paste was non-inferior over about a year (Paszynska 2021). In adults, a hydroxyapatite paste was non-inferior to 1,450 ppm fluoride over 18 months (Paszynska 2023). Both were linked to a hydroxyapatite manufacturer, as was a 2024 review that pooled them. A small independent 2025 review found no significant difference but only four eligible studies.

The American Dental Association's Seal requires fluoride for a cavity-protection claim, and in the US only fluoride pastes can make one. Hydroxyapatite is a reasonable choice if you want to avoid fluoride; fluoride remains the better-established option.

How to read a toothpaste label

1. Find the active ingredient: sodium fluoride, stannous fluoride, sodium monofluorophosphate, hydroxyapatite, or none.
2. Scan the inactive ingredients for PEG (any number), carbomer, PEG/PPG copolymer or poloxamer, polyethylene and acrylates.
3. Cellulose gum, xanthan gum, guar gum and carrageenan are natural or modified-natural thickeners, not plastics.
4. Ignore “microbead-free” claims: microbeads have been banned for years. The question is which polymers are left.