Does Extra Gum Have Microplastics? What Its “Gum Base” Can Contain

Does Extra gum have plastic in it?

Very probably, yes. Extra is made by Mars Wrigley, the same company behind Orbit, 5 and Doublemint. Its ingredient list names “gum base” as the second ingredient and stops there. Gum base is the part that never dissolves, the piece you eventually spit out. In mainstream gum it is a blend of elastomers, resins, waxes and softeners, and the elastomers that federal rules permit include polyvinyl acetate, polyethylene and synthetic rubbers.

We say “very probably” rather than quoting a recipe because Mars Wrigley does not publish one. That is the same reading we give in our Orbit gum verdict, which shares the maker and the same unexplained ingredient. The plastic question has a likely answer. The exact-polymer question does not.

What is Extra gum made of?

Here is what Mars Wrigley lists on its own product pages, retrieved October 18, 2026. Sugar-free Extra and 5 use nearly the same base recipe: a sugar alcohol first, gum base second, then glycerol, flavors and high-intensity sweeteners.

The minor ingredients are ordinary for sugar-free gum: hydrogenated starch hydrolysate, aspartame, mannitol, acesulfame K, soy lecithin, BHT “to maintain freshness” and lake colors. Refreshers swaps sorbitol for xylitol as the lead sweetener and adds acacia. Xylitol is toxic to dogs, so keep the bottle out of a dog’s reach. None of these sweeteners is a polymer that stays in your mouth. The “sugar-free” claim describes the sweetener, not the base.

The Doublemint row comes from Open Food Facts, a crowdsourced database, because we could not load a Mars page for it. Check the pack in your hand.

What can “gum base” contain under FDA rules?

The US rule is 21 CFR 172.615. It lists the substances a chewing-gum base may be made from, each used at the lowest level that does the job. It also lets makers add other substances generally recognized as safe for food, so the list is a floor, not a complete recipe card.

Two words on a label can therefore cover a polyvinyl acetate and polyisobutylene blend or a chicle base. A brand that uses a natural base usually says so by name, which is how the gum brands comparison sorts its table. Extra does not name one.

What has Mars Wrigley disclosed about its gum base?

Less than the question deserves. The Extra and 5 product pages we reviewed list “Gum Base” and point readers to the physical pack as the most accurate source. Neither page describes the polymers, the share of the stick they make up, or the packaging materials.

The most specific description we found is not a Mars quote. A 2012 ConfectioneryNews report on degradable-gum research stated, in its own words, that Wrigley’s gum bases were made from a combination of food-grade polymers, waxes and softeners. That fits the federal rule. It is 14 years old and does not name a polymer, so treat it as background, not a current disclosure.

When the saliva study made news in 2025, the National Confectioners Association, which speaks for US candy and gum makers, told CNN: “Gum is safe to enjoy as it has been for more than 100 years.” That is an industry safety statement. It does not dispute that gum bases contain synthetic polymers, and it does not provide a particle measurement.

Does chewing Extra release microplastics?

Chewing gum does, and there is no reason to think Extra is the exception. There is also no published test of Extra by name. The evidence is one study from UCLA engineers Lisa Lowe, Jamie Leonard and Sanjay Mohanty. It was presented as a pilot at the American Chemical Society meeting in March 2025 and published in the Journal of Hazardous Materials Letters later that year. The team tested five natural and five synthetic gums bought in the US.

• 4 to 636 microplastics per gram of gum were released into saliva, according to the paper’s highlights.
• About 100 per gram on average was the figure given at the conference, with synthetic gums averaging 104 and natural gums 96, as CNN reported. The paper reports the two groups as statistically similar.
• 94% of counted particles came out in the first 8 minutes of chewing.
• Median particle size was 45.4 µm. The method counted particles of roughly 20 µm and larger, so smaller particles and nanoplastics were not counted.
• Four polymer types were identified in both gum groups: polyolefins (the most abundant), PET, polyacrylamides and polystyrenes.

The conference version used a single chewer. And, as University of Portsmouth researcher David Jones told ScienceAlert, some detected plastics are not known gum ingredients and could have come from another source in the lab. Polyolefins fit the gum-base list, since polyethylene is one. PET and polystyrene are not on it.

Can you work out how many particles one stick of Extra releases?

Not honestly. The tempting sum takes 100 particles per gram and multiplies it by Extra’s 2.5 gram stick. But the study did not name its brands, its range ran from 4 to 636 per gram, and it counted only particles above its size cutoff. Attaching an average from 10 unnamed gums to one named brand would invent a precision the data does not have. UCLA’s own release offered a different kind of estimate: someone chewing 160 to 180 pieces a year could swallow around 30,000 microplastics. That is a population-style illustration, not an Extra result.

Use the App

Keep the gum in context

Gum is one small, chewable source. Scan the drinks, containers and packaged foods you use daily to see which declared materials come up most in your routine.

Are 5 gum, Doublemint, Juicy Fruit and Big Red any different?

On the plastic question, no evidence separates them. 5 Gum Cobalt’s label matches Extra Spearmint’s almost line for line. Doublemint is a sugared gum, so the sweetener changes, but it also lists a gum base without naming it. Juicy Fruit and Big Red are sugared Wrigley gums as well; we did not pull their current labels for this page, so check that the pack says “gum base” and whether any base is named. Orbit sits in the same family. Mars may use different base formulations across these lines; we found no public document saying whether it does.

That is why searches for “is Wrigley’s gum made of plastic” get the same answer as Extra: a permitted synthetic base is the likely reading, the exact polymers are undisclosed, and none of these products has a public, brand-named particle test in the sources we reviewed. Sugar versus sugar-free is not a microplastic variable, though it matters a great deal for teeth.

Do the wrapper and the bottle matter?

Much less than the base. The gum base is a polymer you work between your teeth for minutes, and that chewing action is what released particles in the study. A wrapper touches the stick only while it is stored, at room temperature and without abrasion.

Extra comes as wrapped sticks in a pack, as Refreshers pieces in a 40-piece bottle, and in multipacks. The product pages we reviewed do not state the wrapper or bottle materials, so we will not guess at a polymer. If cutting plastic packaging matters to you for waste reasons, stick packs and refills beat a new bottle each time. For particle exposure, that choice is a rounding error next to how much you chew. Our test summary for plastic-wrapped candies covers the packaging-contact question for sweets more directly.

What the evidence does not establish

• An Extra particle count. The reviewed sources did not include a public particle test of Extra, 5, Doublemint, Juicy Fruit or Big Red by name.
• Extra’s exact polymers. The federal rule tells you what is allowed, not which of those Mars uses or in what proportion.
• Whether gum is the main source of the particles found. The study counted particles in saliva, and an outside expert questioned whether some polymer types came from the lab.
• Particles below about 20 µm. The method could not count them, so the totals are not a full inventory.
• A health effect. Mohanty himself said scientists don’t know whether microplastics are unsafe to us, and there are no human trials. The FDA says current evidence does not show that the levels of microplastics or nanoplastics detected in foods pose a risk to human health.
• That swallowing gum is a microplastic problem in itself. The study measured release into saliva during chewing, not what happens to a swallowed piece.

What should you chew instead?

Start with the habit, because that is where the evidence points. Then pick the label you prefer.

1. Chew fewer pieces and keep one going longer. Most counted particles came out in the first 8 minutes, so a fresh piece every few minutes repeats the heaviest release. Lowe made the same suggestion when the results came out.
2. Choose a named natural base if you want petroleum polymers off the ingredient list. Simply Gum lists chicle. Expect a cleaner label, not a particle-free chew, since the natural gums in the study shed about as much.
3. Read “natural” and “aspartame-free” brands as carefully as Extra. PUR is aspartame-free, but it lists gum base without naming chicle.
4. Use a mint or no gum for breath. A xylitol mint has no gum base at all. If fresh breath is the goal, brushing does more. Our guide to polymer-free toothpaste covers that side.
5. Keep sugar-free gum if your dentist recommends it. If you chew after meals for your teeth, one piece chewed for longer keeps that habit while trimming the particle question.

The Trident verdict applies the same reasoning to Mondelēz’s best-known gum, if that is the other pack in your bag.