At the moment’s publication is extra technical than traditional. In case you love information, you’ll get pleasure from this deep dive—it exposes one of many greatest myths in oral well being proper now.
For individuals who favor the plain-English model, right here’s a easy breakdown of what you’ll be taught:
- The “10% nano-hydroxyapatite” declare is a fable.
- A brand new peer-reviewed research in contrast Fygg’s 3.1% nano-Hydroxyapatite formulation towards Boka, Risewell, Simply Components, Dr. Jen, Crest Cavity Safety, and ClinPro 5000 (a prescription-strength 5000 ppm fluoride toothpaste).
- High quality of particles—not amount—makes the distinction.
- An excessive amount of nHA clumps, reduces enamel binding, and works much less successfully.
There’s a humorous factor that occurs on the planet of well being…
Somebody misreads the science, then turns that misinterpretation right into a advertising and marketing slogan, and earlier than you realize it, everybody’s treating it like gospel.
We’ve seen this film earlier than. Nina Teicholz’s The Large Fats Shock is a living proof: early misinterpretations of diet analysis—like blaming dietary fats for coronary heart illness—have been enshrined in official tips and amplified by advertising and marketing.
That a long time‑lengthy detour into low‑fats recommendation fueled weight problems, diabetes, and coronary heart illness. An ideal instance of how unhealthy science interpretation killed lots of people.
On the planet of hydroxyapatite toothpastes, that slogan has grow to be: “It needs to be 10% nano-hydroxyapatite—or it doesn’t work.” And it’s flat out improper.
Instagram influencers parroted the ten% factor like gospel. One model constructed its complete id round that quantity. Some even implied that in case your toothpaste didn’t hit that quantity, it wasn’t doing something in any respect.
For a break up second, I second‑guessed our formulation at Fish. I requested colleagues and critics to indicate me the research that supposedly proved the ten% declare. Time and again, the proof didn’t maintain up.
The deeper I regarded, and the extra I spoke to the biochemists and oral microbiome scientists, the extra insane the ten% declare gave the impression to be. As a result of should you’ve spent sufficient time within the science—actually checked out how the oral microbiome works, how mineral particles behave within the mouth—you realize: extra isn’t at all times higher.
In reality, an excessive amount of nano-hydroxyapatite (nHA) can really work towards you.
Right here’s why I’m writing about this in the present day—because of a brand-new, peer-reviewed, Fygg-funded researchwe lastly have the info to indicate precisely why that call was the proper one.
Simply revealed within the Journal of Dentistry (2025), this in vitro research examined eight main remineralizing toothpastes—together with fluoride, nano-HAP, micro-HAP, and sure, a widely known “10% nano-HAP” model.
Direct from the research: “The superior efficacy of Fygg over Dr. Jen and Risewell is probably going attributable to its enhanced physicochemical properties, quite than merely the focus of lively components. In distinction, concerning Boka, Fygg’s superior efficiency could primarily consequence from the upper focus of nanoXIM in its formulation.”
And it did that utilizing simply 3.1% nano-hydroxyapatite.
Much more placing: Fygg toothpaste carried out on par with prescription‑power fluoride toothpaste—the gold commonplace for remineralization, typically $20-27 and solely accessible with a health care provider’s prescription.
How can that be?
Why Extra Isn’t Higher
You may’t simply maintain including extra and anticipate higher outcomes. In reality, an excessive amount of nHA can result in aggregation (it gained’t dissolve so it begins clumping into large chunks)—which decreases how effectively it disperses throughout the enamel floor, reduces bioavailability, and as proved by the research, reduces means to reverse cavities.
“Particle measurement and formulation design seem to play a pivotal function within the therapeutic consequence… The superior efficacy of Fygg was possible because of its optimized particle morphology and decrease focus of nanoXIM.” (Journal of Dentistry2025)
I admire that quote and that is a part of our secret sauce, however there’s extra to the formulation than that—I can go into this in additional element in a future publication, if people have an interest. We have been in search of the proper focus of nano-Hydroxyapatite in saliva, for it to be saved in saliva earlier than it’s taken up by the tooth. Clumping or “clogging” the saliva doesn’t work effectively—it’s like including an excessive amount of salt to water and a few of it doesn’t dissolve.
NanoXIM is a proprietary mix of nHA engineered at simply the proper measurement—smaller than 50nm, with a exact rod-shaped morphology—designed to imitate pure enamel.
Why the ten% Declare Is Unsuitable
The ten% quantity relies on a 2009 and 2011 research from China when, again then, the scientific neighborhood had not but outlined the dimensions of “nano” and the uniformity and purity.
10% was the bottom threshold at which crude samples of nano-hydroxyapatite began to indicate a measurable impact. However expertise has moved on. Particle morphology, floor cost, supply medium—all of that issues greater than brute focus. A lot of manufacturers on the market are utilizing micro-sized particles, and the uptake of micro is solely inferior to nano.
Sadly in that crude pattern have been items of nano hydroxyapatite that don’t match the present SCCS tips for security. (that’s a special argument however what they’re doing is doping the formulation, making it much less protected, when 2 and three% works simply tremendous IF it’s pure and prime quality).
Fygg makes use of 20% NanoXIM paste, which incorporates 15.5% nHA, leading to a 3.1% whole lively nHA—and that was confirmed to be simpler than the complete 10% in different pastes.
“HAP particles bigger than 1.3 μm have restricted adhesion to enamel, whereas these under this threshold exhibit sturdy floor binding… Standard micro-HAPs steadily include particles exceeding 5 µm, which present little to no efficient enamel adhesion.” (Journal of Dentistry2025)
After I determined I wished to make a toothpaste, it was of utmost significance to me that if I used to be convincing mother and father to go fluoride-free, the choice labored as effectively—if not higher. That meant working with chemists, researchers, and oral microbiome specialists to seek out the precise ratio that may…
- Penetrate subsurface lesions for elevated depth of remineralization
- Keep away from aggregation (clumping of nHAp particles making them much less efficient and accessible for remineralization)
- Respect the oral microbiome (the engine for remineralization)
And now, we lastly have a peer-reviewed research to substantiate what chemists and scientists have identified all alongside!
It’s straightforward to consider that if one thing is sweet, extra should be higher. However there’s at all times a candy spot relating to metabolism and organic processes and programs—issues like pH steadiness, oxygen saturation within the blood, and numerous different finely tuned features. An excessive amount of and too little will be lethal in these two programs.
So, it’s not “what’s the correct quantity for tooth” it’s “what’s the correct quantity for saliva” in order that tooth can really seize it when wanted!
I’m proud Fygg led with science. And I’m grateful to the researchers who proved what we knew all alongside.
Right here’s to science, more healthy mouths, and fewer clumps in your toothpaste.
Dr. B
P.S. Know somebody who’s parroting the ten% fable? Ahead this to them — they by no means should miss one other publication in the event that they join future emails right here.
