In May 2025 the oral-care industry got a wake-up call. Procter & Gamble (Crest) challenged Essor Group's Boka nano-hydroxyapatite toothpaste before the National Advertising Division (NAD) of BBB National Programs, questioning the substantiation behind Boka's fluoride-free remineralization, whitening and prebiotic claims.
What NAD decided
NAD found that the studies Essor submitted were about nano-hydroxyapatite as an ingredient — none tested Boka's finished product. That distinction turned out to be decisive. Showing that an ingredient does something in a lab is not the same as proving your specific formulation delivers that benefit in real use. NAD recommended the remineralization and whitening claims be discontinued or modified.
Essor appealed to the National Advertising Review Board (NARB), which in July 2025 largely upheld NAD's findings, noting that neither the FDA nor the ADA has concluded that nano-hydroxyapatite remineralizes teeth, and that claims of this kind need product-specific evidence.
Why it matters for anyone choosing a toothpaste
The ruling doesn't mean fluoride-free products are unsafe or ineffective. It means the bar for marketing claims is now clear: test the actual product, not just the ingredient, and publish the results. Brands that invest in product-specific clinical validation will have a real advantage in a category worth more than $6 billion globally.
Where ENAMÜR stands
Both ENAMÜR studies — the randomized clinical plaque-removal trial in Dentistry Journal and the stain-removal, abrasion and anticaries assessment in Journal of Dentistry — tested the finished formula against named, marketed toothpastes using standard dental-industry methods, and were published in peer-reviewed journals. That is the standard regulators are now asking the whole industry to meet.
Summary prepared by ENAMÜR. This article is for general information only and is not legal advice.
