Sensodyne · Dental Floss
Dental floss Sensodyne Volume Peri-dent Star S 35m
Lower PFAS concern; standard nylon floss has no known PFAS treatment need, but Sensodyne discloses nothing.
Sensodyne's dental floss appears to be conventional nylon monofilament without coating or waterproofing, making PFAS risk lower than coated alternatives. No public disclosure from Sensodyne about PFAS or Teflon-family coating in this product.
Shop Sensodyne on Amazon →Material
Nylon monofilament (standard dental floss)
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
Sensodyne Peri-dent Star S is nylon monofilament dental floss, the most common floss material globally. Nylon is a synthetic polymer that does not leach into the mouth during normal use because floss contact with saliva is brief and the material is not heated or abraded significantly during flossing. No additives such as waxes, flavoring agents, or reinforcing resins are expected to migrate into oral tissues at measurable levels under typical flossing conditions.
The brand's record and disclosure
Sensodyne (GlaxoSmithKline subsidiary) does not publicly disclose material sourcing, chemical composition, or PFAS testing for this floss product. The brand maintains no visible third-party certifications (e.g., ISO, NSF) for dental care products. No product recalls or safety controversies specific to Sensodyne dental floss are on record in major regulatory databases (FDA, CPSC, EU). The silence on transparency is typical rather than exceptional for mainstream dental floss manufacturers.
How it compares in its category
Nylon monofilament floss is standard across all major brands (Oral-B, Crest, GUM, store brands) and carries no known material-safety advantage or disadvantage versus competitors. Alternatives such as silk floss (biodegradable but less durable) or polytetrafluoroethylene (Teflon-type coating) floss carry different trade-offs but not lower chemical risk. Sensodyne's 35-meter spool is a typical size; length does not correlate with safety.
If you buy it
Store floss at room temperature in a dry location; nylon does not degrade under normal home conditions. Replace the spool when the floss becomes frayed or when the dispenser empties, typically every 1 to 3 months depending on daily use. Do not heat, boil, or expose floss to strong solvents. Discard after use; floss is single-use and not reusable.
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 microfibers in gum tissue
No published evidence shows nylon floss fibers embedding in gums or causing irritation at typical flossing pressures. Monofilament design minimizes fiber shedding during normal use.
Dye or colorant migration
Sensodyne does not disclose whether the floss is dyed or naturally white. No safety data on pigments in dental floss is available, but oral floss does not remain in contact with tissue long enough for significant dye transfer under established flossing guidelines.
Wax or coating toxicity
Dental floss is often waxed with paraffin or similar food-grade wax to ease threading. No toxicological concern is established for brief oral contact with floss wax in normal use.
Flavoring agent irritation
Product name does not indicate added flavor; even if flavoring is present, exposure is minimal and episodic. No adverse events linked to flavored dental floss are recorded.
Nylon polymer stability
Nylon does not hydrolyze or degrade under saliva pH (6.5 to 7.5) at body temperature over the seconds to minutes of typical flossing. No leaching of monomers or oligomers is expected.
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.