Can a toothpaste 'improve gums by up to 73 per cent'?
Updated on 12 August 2006
FactCheck brushes up on Colgate's claim...
The Claim
"Colgate's new Time Control toothpaste provides protection against the signs of ageing in your mouth. [It] protects teeth against cavities ... helps fight gum recession ... can improve gums by up to 73 per cent"
Colgate website
August 2006
Background
Toothpastes are becoming ever more sophisticated. It's no longer enough for a brand to merely clean your teeth - now competing products promise to whiten teeth, fight bad breath and even balance female hormones.
Colgate's Time Control is one of the first anti-ageing toothpaste products on the market and in its recent TV ad campaign horse trainer Tracey Bailey expounds its benefits. "You can't control time but you can control its effects," she says.
When she started to notice her gums recede - as a result of ageing, it implies - she decided to take action and started using Time Control. An authoritative male voiceover then explains the science behind the product. "Colgate Time Control penetrates gums and makes them up to 73 per cent healthier, helping prevent them from receding further," he says.
Analysis
Colgate ran a six-month clinical trial of Time Control, the results of which the company says indicates that gums can improve by up to 73 per cent with the twice daily use.
Results were taken at three and six months, and, though the company admits that individual results will vary, it says that additional consumer trials indicated a "noticeable improvement" in the gums in as little as two weeks.
The company said it could not share any further information on the trial, however. The results are as yet unpublished, but the company said that it complied with EU and UK cosmetics legislation which requires products to have adequate support for claims made.
The 73 per cent improvement to which the advertisement and website refer relates to the difference in both plaque and gingivitis reduction in the clinical scores taken at the start of the trial and at the end.
"As the health of the gums improves, consumers would generally notice less bleeding (after brushing for example), firmer-feeling gums etc," a Colgate spokesperson said.
But Nigel Carter, chief executive of the British Dental Health Association, said: "I cannot see how they can judge that gums improved by 73 per cent. It's quite an extreme claim. In fact it's probably the most dramatic claim in the marketplace and it would be nice to see the study on which it is based."
(Contd.)
This particular campaign was brought to his attention prior to its launch by a rival manufacturer who did not tell him that it was a Colgate product. At the time he thought the 73 per cent improvement claim was "ridiculous". "You can't have a claim like that about a toothpaste." But he added that the reputation of Colgate is such that it would be surprised if the claim was not based on rigorous scientific evidence.
But without knowing details of the study a degree of scepticism surrounds the claims, Carter told FactCheck. "It's a question of the standards of the study," he says.
He would like to know how many people took part in the study and the particular circumstances on which it was based. "It may be the case that gum health improved by 73 per cent, but what about unsupervised consumers who brush for an average of 45 seconds rather than two minutes, and I'd like to know if those taking part in the study were flossing for example?" he says.
Colgate said that "in excess of 100" people took part in the study but would not give further details of the study.
Dr Renee Paffaris, associate dentist for private dental practice Andrea Ubhi said that such a claim would need to be based on research that involved "very large number of participants."
"If they just tested 150 people that's not enough. It would need to be several hundred thousand," she said.
The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) polices the ad industry and has strict guidelines around claims made by manufacturers of health products. "The general rule is that it must be able to stand up to objective substantiation," said an ASA spokesman. He says it is not important whether data is published or not but the claim needs to based on scientific data that is rigorous, robust and able to be proved beyond reasonable doubt.
The ASA can only begin investigation of a specific product's claims if a complaint is made against it. Once a complaint was made, the subsequent investigation would involve looking at the data available and deciding whether it provided sufficient proof. The ASA would be privy to the research on which the claim was based but would not reveal it to the public or the complainant. Instead it summarises the evidence with which it is presented.
Earlier this year Colgate fell foul of the ASA code with an ad for Colgate Sensitive. Guidelines forbid ads to show approval of or preference for a particular product by a dentist. A Colgate Sensitive ad showed a woman being recommended appropriate toothpaste for sensitive teeth, and, though the dentist didn't not mention the brand, the Colgate tube appeared on the TV screen as she was describing her condition.
The Committee for Advertising Practice ruled that Colgate change all of its ads that imply dentists gave their seal of approval to the brand.
(Contd.)
Colgate claims that gum recession is an inevitable part of the ageing process and that 87 per cent of over 35s suffer from some form of gum recession.
But dental experts dispute the inevitability of a link between recession and age. "Gum recession is not necessarily linked to old age", says Paffaris. She says that while older people are more likely to experience gum recession - having brushed their teeth for longer than young people - the main causes of gum recession are over-brushing and gum disease, which are not confined to the older age group.
The two key active ingredients used in Colgate Time Control to control the ageing process are Vitamin E and Zinc Citrate. Vitamin E it says is "specially formulated to help control the effects of time and maintain a youthful smile" by invigorating and strengthening gums and protecting the exposed root area against cavities.
Dr Paffaris says that Vitamin E helps skin and connected tissue and may have some benefit in a toothpaste but is likely to be of more benefit taken systemically.
Periodontologist Stephen Pretorius does not like to see any adverts that claim to solve dental problems. "Nothing in the market can replace mechanical cleaning and flossing to stop deterioration," he says. "A toothpaste won't change ageing".
He says that while he believes Colgate makes the best toothpaste in the market, its claims should be made in context. "If you have a disease it needs to be treated" he says.
Of its claim to be able to improve gums by up to 73 per cent, he says, "My scientific unbiased opinion is that it's totally unrealistic to make such a statement."
FactCheck Rating: 3 (How ratings work)
Verdict
Without access to the study on which Colgate has based its data, it is impossible to prove or disprove its 73 per cent improvement claim, but dental health experts have expressed deep scepticism about the claim.
The Sources
Colgate Time Control website
Recent Advertising Standards Agency adjuducations on toothpaste ads, February 2006
Your view
You've read the article, now have your say. We want to know your experiences and your views. We also want to know if there are any claims you want given the FactCheck treatment. Email factcheck@channel4.com
FactCheck will correct significant errors in a timely manner, Readers should direct their enquiries to the Editor at the email address above.
How ratings work
ery time a FactCheck article is published we'll give it a rating from zero to five.
The lower end of the scale indicates that the claim in question largerly checks out, while the upper end of the scale suggests misrepresentation, exaggeration, a massaging of statistics and/or language.
In the unlikely event that we award a 5 out of 5, our factcheckers have concluded that the claim under examination has absolutely no basis in fact.
