The Defender Children’s Health Defense News and Views
Close menu
Close menu

You must be a CHD Insider to save this article Sign Up

Already an Insider? Log in

January 9, 2026 Health Conditions Toxic Exposures News

Toxic Exposures

P&G Agrees to Stop Deceptive Marketing of Crest Toothpaste to Kids

Under the terms of an agreement reached last month with Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, P&G’s advertising of its children’s toothpaste to children under age 6 will reflect age-appropriate toothpaste amounts. Paxton said P&G’s use of misleading images of excessive amounts of fluoride toothpaste put children’s health and brain development at risk.

toddler brushing teeth and bottle of crest kids toothpaste

Procter & Gamble (P&G) will limit its deceptive marketing of Crest fluoride toothpaste to children, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton announced Thursday.

Under the terms of an agreement reached last month, P&G’s advertising of its children’s toothpaste to children under age 6 will reflect age-appropriate toothpaste amounts, beginning this month.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the American Dental Association (ADA), the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and others recommend that children under age 3 use no more than a “smear” of fluoride toothpaste. Children ages 3 to 6 should use no more than a “pea-sized” amount.

Crest’s marketing materials often show images of a toothbrush with a full strip of toothpaste, implying a full strip is the recommended quantity.

Research has shown that advertising and labeling tactics by toothpaste manufacturers prompt parents to use more toothpaste than is safe, leading children to overconsume toothpaste.

A 2024 study in Nature found that parents tend to overload toothbrushes by a factor of six to seven times the recommended amount.

“When parents are teaching their kids the basic habit of brushing their teeth, they shouldn’t have to worry about deceptive marketing endangering their children,” said Paxton.

“Misleading images that show excessive amounts of fluoride toothpaste put children’s health and brain development at risk. This settlement is an important step in ensuring that large corporations like P&G no longer engage in these deceptive practices.”

In May 2024, Paxton launched an investigation into the makers of Colgate and Crest toothpastes for marketing fluoride toothpaste products to parents and kids in ways that are “misleading, deceptive, and dangerous.”

Paxton reached a similar agreement with Colgate-Palmolive in September 2025.

Agreement leaves ‘major loophole,’ attorney says

Paxton’s allegations mirrored those pending in six class action lawsuits filed in January 2025 by attorney Michael Connett, partner at Siri & Glimstad, on behalf of plaintiffs.

Those lawsuits accuse major dental product manufacturers of deceptively marketing products containing fluoride to young children and misleading parents into believing the products are safe for toddlers.

The lawsuits name children’s toothpaste brands Crest and Colgate/Tom’s of Maine; and the children’s mouth rinse brands Act, Colgate/Tom’s of Maine, Firefly and Hello.

Connett commended Paxton for taking action against the companies in a post on X.

However, the agreement contains “a major loophole” that will allow the company to “continue deceiving parents of young children,” Connett said.

He said the agreement forbids the company from showing full strips of toothpaste, but still allows them to show “pea-sized” images of fluoride toothpaste for children under age 3.

“This is much more fluoride than is currently recommended, even by pro-fluoride organizations such as the ADA, AAP and AAPD,” the American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry, he said.

Class action lawsuits move forward

The class action lawsuits addressed a wider range of deceptive marketing practices by fluoride toothpaste and mouthwash manufacturers targeting children.

They also allege the companies design their product labels with candy and fruit juice flavors and images and cartoon characters to appeal to young children, often misleading them to think the products are meant to be consumed as food. This violates the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) and several state consumer fraud statutes, according to the lawsuits.

In all the class actions, defendants filed motions to dismiss the case. In the two rulings issued on those motions so far — against P&G and Firefly — the courts denied the motions. The cases are proceeding to discovery.

P&G asked for permission to immediately appeal the decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, but the court also denied that request.

“We are thus one step closer to these companies being held accountable, for the first time in their history, for the deceptive marketing they have used to sell fluoride products to the parents of young children,” Connett said.

Soon after the court denied Firefly’s motion to dismiss, its makers stopped selling one of its most popular fluoride rinses, Buzz Lightyear. Its L.O.L, Surprise! version remains available.

Related articles in The Defender 

Suggest A Correction

Share Options

Close menu

Republish Article

Please use the HTML above to republish this article. It is pre-formatted to follow our republication guidelines. Among other things, these require that the article not be edited; that the author’s byline is included; and that The Defender is clearly credited as the original source.

Please visit our full guidelines for more information. By republishing this article, you agree to these terms.

Woman drinking coffee looking at phone

Join hundreds of thousands of subscribers who rely on The Defender for their daily dose of critical analysis and accurate, nonpartisan reporting on Big Pharma, Big Food, Big Chemical, Big Energy, and Big Tech and
their impact on children’s health and the environment.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
    MM slash DD slash YYYY
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form