Tom's of Maine · Dental Floss
Tom's of Maine Naturally Waxed Anti-Plaque Flat Floss Spearmint 32 Yards (Pack of 3), Green
Lower PFAS concern for a waxed floss with no known Teflon-family coating or water-repellent coating treatments, but brand is silent on formulation.
Tom's of Maine's waxed floss uses natural wax as a stated coating rather than synthetic Teflon-family coating or water-resistant treatments typical of PFAS sources. The brand does not disclose PFAS testing or claim PFAS-free status.
Shop Tom's of Maine on Amazon →Material
natural wax coating on nylon/polymer 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
This floss uses nylon filament coated with natural wax (typically beeswax or plant-derived wax) rather than synthetic Teflon-family coating coatings. The nylon core is a standard thermoplastic polymer with no known leaching concerns at mouth temperature and humidity. The spearmint flavoring is a food-grade essential oil derivative, not a synthetic fragrance, which reduces allergy risk. Natural wax coating avoids the Teflon-type coating and Teflon-family coating concerns found in many conventional floss brands.
The brand's record and disclosure
Tom's of Maine is owned by Colgate-Palmolive but operates under a reputation for natural formulations and ingredient transparency. The brand publishes ingredient lists clearly and does not use synthetic dyes or heavy metal pigments in oral care products. No recalls or adverse event reports are on record for this floss line. The company has not made specific public statements about PFAS avoidance in floss, but the absence of water-repellent coating or Teflon-family coating treatments in the stated formula is itself indicative of lower PFAS risk.
How it compares in its category
Most conventional floss brands use Teflon-type coating-based coatings (which may contain PFAS compounds) or synthetic waxes; Tom's of Maine's natural wax approach is less common and represents a lower-risk choice. Unwaxed floss eliminates coating concerns but may be harder to use between tight contacts. Charcoal-infused or whitening floss variants from other brands sometimes add titanium dioxide or other additives; this product avoids such additions. The 32-yard size and three-pack format is standard market offerings with no safety distinction.
If you buy it
Store in a cool, dry place away from direct heat or sunlight, as excessive warmth can soften the natural wax coating. Replace the spool when wax coating becomes noticeably crumbly or unravels easily, typically after 3 to 6 months of regular use depending on frequency. Use gentle pressure to avoid gum trauma; the thinner wax layer compared to synthetic coatings means it provides less mechanical lubrication. No special disposal required beyond normal trash; natural wax and nylon are not hazardous waste.
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.”
Fragrance sensitization (spearmint flavoring)
Spearmint essential oil is food-grade and generally recognized as safe, but mint compounds can trigger sensitivity in individuals with oral mucosa inflammation or fragrance allergies. Incidence is low and reactions are typically mild local irritation rather than systemic toxicity.
Nylon microfiber shedding
No established evidence that nylon floss sheds microplastics into the mouth during normal use. Nylon filaments are tightly twisted and do not unravel under gentle pressure; shed fibers would be microscopic and likely swallowed harmlessly rather than accumulating.
Natural wax purity and contaminants
Tom's of Maine does not disclose the specific source or processing method of the natural wax used. If sourced from insects (beeswax) or plants, contaminant risk is low, but the brand has not published third-party testing results for wax purity. No recalls or complaints on record suggest actual contamination is not a practical concern.
Coating degradation and oral exposure
Natural wax coating will gradually wear away with use; the underlying nylon is inert and poses no known health risk if exposed. Degraded wax pieces are swallowed and not absorbed, so there is no accumulation risk even with long-term use of the product.
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.