Plackers · Dental Floss
Plackers Back Teeth Micro Mint Dental
Lower PFAS concern; basic dental pick with no known water-resistant coatings or nonstick treatments.
Plackers Back Teeth Micro Mint is a simple nylon dental floss pick with no reported PFAS-containing coatings or treatments. The brand makes no public PFAS claims.
Shop Plackers on Amazon →Material
Nylon monofilament dental floss pick
Brand disclosure
Brand is silent on PFAS
Lab data
No public lab test
Why this grade
Category baseline
cosmetics is a category where PFAS exposure is more common.
No PFAS disclosure
No public statement about PFAS in this product.
Safe base material
Made from a material with no inherent PFAS use (ceramic, mineral, or natural fiber).
The full breakdown
What it's made of and why it matters
Plackers Back Teeth Micro Mint uses nylon monofilament (single synthetic fiber strand) as the flossing element, a standard dental material chosen for strength and flexibility. Nylon does not leach significant chemicals into the oral cavity during normal use because it is chemically inert and not heat-exposed in the mouth. The monofilament design minimizes surface area compared to woven floss, reducing potential for fiber fragmentation or material shedding. The mint flavoring is a food-grade additive applied to the floss surface and poses no documented safety concern at typical usage levels.
The brand's record and disclosure
Plackers (Church & Dwight subsidiary) does not publish detailed chemical safety or PFAS disclosure statements for its dental floss products, which is typical for the oral care category. No recalls, safety alerts, or published toxicity concerns are documented for this product line. The brand maintains standard oral care product liability and regulatory compliance with FDA guidelines for dental devices but does not voluntarily report composition beyond marketing claims. No third-party certifications (organic, cruelty-free, sustainability) are prominently marketed for this item.
How it compares in its category
Nylon monofilament picks like this are among the safest floss formats because they avoid waxed string products (which may contain microplastic-shedding coatings or undisclosed additives) and do not use water-resistant treatments that could introduce PFAS. Traditional string floss carries slightly higher risk of wax composition variability and coating additives; unwaxed versions eliminate that concern but are less common. Plackers' pick design is simpler than mechanized water-flosser units, which have their own pump seals and housing materials to consider. The Micro Mint variant is functionally equivalent to unflavored versions; mint is a cosmetic preference, not a safety upgrade or downgrade.
If you buy it
Use as directed once daily or after meals; nylon monofilament does not degrade with normal oral moisture and saliva exposure. Replace individual picks when the floss strand becomes frayed, visibly damaged, or loses effectiveness, typically every 1-2 weeks depending on use frequency. No special storage is required beyond keeping the container dry and sealed to prevent dust contamination. Do not reuse a single pick multiple times across different tooth surfaces, as this spreads bacteria; each use should be fresh.
Beyond PFAS: other things we checked
Established hazard classes for this product type, assessed from public information. These never change the PFAS grade; a Likely flag caps the Verdict at “Buy with care.”
Nylon fiber fragmentation and microplastic ingestion
Worn or damaged monofilament can splinter and shed small fibers; while the quantity per use is minimal, chronic daily flossing with degraded picks may result in trace fiber ingestion. Risk is low if picks are replaced regularly before visible fraying.
Mint flavoring allergens or irritants
Food-grade mint flavoring at this concentration has no documented adverse effects in oral health literature. Individuals with sensitivity to menthol or mint extracts may experience mild mouth irritation, but this is rare and product-specific only if it occurs.
Bacterial or fungal growth on reused picks
If a single pick is used repeatedly or stored damp, oral bacteria can colonize the nylon surface. This is a hygiene issue, not a chemical hazard, and is avoided by using one pick per flossing session and replacing frequently.
Pick handle material composition
The plastic or composite handle material is not specified in marketing or technical documentation. Assuming standard polyethylene or polypropylene, no hazards are expected, but full composition transparency is not available from the brand.
Heavy metals or dyes in flavoring additives
No recalls or regulatory findings document heavy metal contamination or azo dye use in Plackers floss products. The mint flavoring is assumed to meet FDA food additive standards, though independent testing data is not publicly available.
What we don’t know
This grade is a model-based estimate from public materials, coatings, and brand disclosure at 72% confidence. It is not a lab result.
No independent PFAS lab test is on record for this exact product. A lab test could move the score in either direction.
The brand has not made a specific, verifiable PFAS-free statement, so part of this score reflects that missing disclosure rather than a confirmed material.
Formulations and coatings change between production runs. Always check the current label before buying.
Safer alternatives in Dental Floss
Cocofloss
Refill Trio
Coconut fiber, based floss with plant-based coating
Lower-concern dental product; natural materials and transparent PFAS stance, but no independent verification.
⚠Risky category by default
Dental Lace
Refillable Silk Dental Floss
Silk floss with compostable refillable packaging
Lower concern; silk floss with credible PFAS-free positioning and third-party certification.
✓Verified PFAS-free by a third party
Dental Lace
Plant Based/Vegan Floss Refillable Glass Container PFAS-Free (2 Spools/4-
Plant-based vegan floss (likely plant cellulose or silk fibers)
Lower-concern product with explicit PFAS-free claim; no third-party verification limits certainty.
⚠Risky category by default
More dental floss grades
How we score: every product runs through the same public 0–100 rubric based on materials, coatings, brand disclosure, lab findings, and recalls. See the full methodology → Spotted a mistake? Report an error.