What if you could whiten your teeth without peroxide at all, simply by brushing with a material that creates its own electric charge?

What if whitening your teeth didn’t require peroxide at all, but instead relied on a natural material that produces an electric charge when you brush? In this episode of Dental Formulator’s Playbook, Dr. Rob and Tami explore how piezoelectric materials, especially Rochelle salt, may offer a completely different approach to tooth whitening.

Dr. Rob explains how piezoelectric crystals generate charge when pressed, why Rochelle salt stands out among natural piezoelectric materials, and how brushing friction could play a key role in stain reduction. They also discuss peroxide based whitening, enamel effects, alternative mechanisms involving chromophore reduction, the importance of abrasives, chelating behavior of tartrate salts, and how patents shape innovation in whitening technology.

Highlights

• Why a peer reviewed paper on piezoelectric whitening caught Dr. Rob’s attention

• What piezoelectric materials are and how they generate charge under pressure

• How early research by the Curie brothers helped define piezoelectricity

• Why natural materials like quartz, sugar, DNA, and Rochelle salt can show piezoelectric effects

• How Rochelle salt was first prepared in the 1600s in La Rochelle, France

• Why Rochelle salt is considered a double salt containing sodium and potassium

• How brushing friction and abrasives may help generate charges needed for whitening

• Why the inventors patented the use of Rochelle salt specifically for whitening applications

• How peroxide creates radicals and why it may soften enamel or increase sensitivity

• Why Rochelle salt did not show enamel weakening in the whitening data Dr. Rob reviewed

• How reducing chromophores like quinones to colorless forms may explain whitening without peroxide

• How tartrate salts act as chelators and can influence stannous fluoride stability

• Why abrasives and silica choice matter in piezoelectric based formulas

• How zinc oxide could be another piezoelectric ingredient worth exploring

• Why real validation still requires clinical testing and sensitivity evaluation

• How patent strategy and first to file rules impact oral care innovation

📲 Connect with Dr. Rob (Robert L. Karlinsey, PhD)

🌐 Website: customdentalformulations.com

📄 Research Profile: Robert Karlinsey on ResearchGate

What if the real reason your toothpaste works great or fails completely has nothing to do with marketing and everything to do with your saliva, your habits, and your unique oral chemistry?

In this episode of Dental Formulator’s Playbook, Dr. Rob and Tami unpack one of the most overlooked questions in oral care: why people choose the products they use. From tartar control to sensitivity, they explore how ingredients like baking soda, hydroxyapatite, calcium phosphates, bioglass, fluoride, stannous fluoride, and potassium nitrate behave in the real world.

You’ll hear why a formula that works beautifully for one person can create problems for another, how pH drives tartar formation, and what consumers should understand before switching to “natural” or alternative products. Dr. Rob and Tami also highlight formulation compatibility issues and walk through sensitivity treatments ranging from OTC toothpastes to medical-device varnishes, ensuring listeners see the full picture behind effective oral-care choices.

Highlights

• Why understanding your “why” is the foundation of choosing the right oral care product

• How acidic or alkaline saliva drives both caries risk and tartar formation

• Real world lessons from a clinician who used baking soda and developed unexpected tartar buildup

• How elevated pH, diet, and mineral heavy products can interact to create tartar challenges

• Why hydroxyapatite, CPP ACP, and bioglass can help but also contribute to unwanted mineral deposits

• The major differences between enamel building ingredients and those that only occlude tubules

• How Sensodyne (potassium nitrate or stannous fluoride) delivers sensitivity relief and why not every system works for everyone

• Why bioglass helps some people with sensitivity but may increase tartar risk for others

• The limitations of hydroxyapatite for sensitivity, especially with limited clinical support

• When varnishes and medical device sensitivity treatments make sense and how they work

• The science behind potassium oxalate mouthrinses and how they form acid resistant calcium oxalate

• Why 1.1 percent sodium fluoride toothpastes can dramatically reduce caries and sensitivity

• How functionalized tricalcium phosphate enhances fluoride performance without contributing to tartar formation

• Why consumers shouldn’t hesitate to pivot products when side effects arise

📲 Connect with Dr. Rob (Robert L. Karlinsey, PhD)

🌐 Website: customdentalformulations.com

📄 Research Profile: Robert Karlinsey on ResearchGate

What if the fluoride in your toothpaste is not all the same, and the form you choose could change how well it works?

In this episode of Dental Formulator’s Playbook, Dr. Rob and co host Tami break down the chemistry, formulation challenges, and clinical performance of the three fluoride salts approved for use in the United States: sodium fluoride, sodium monofluorophosphate, and stannous fluoride. They explain why each compound behaves differently, how abrasives influence stability, and how manufacturing history shaped which toothpaste formulas became global standards. The conversation also includes new research confirming the safety of community water fluoridation and debunks long standing myths about cognitive effects. This episode is essential listening for anyone who wants to understand why fluoride choice matters and how formulation truly determines efficacy.

🔍 Highlights ↠

• How sodium fluoride differs from sodium monofluorophosphate in activation and availability

• Why MFP requires plaque enzymes and saliva to release active fluoride

• Why MFP performs poorly for people with dry mouth

• The real reason MFP dominated formulas in the 60s and 70s

• How calcium carbonate abrasives blocked early sodium fluoride formulas

• How sodium MFP is made using a water free fusion process at 900 degrees Celsius

• The surprising global history of MFP and why early records are often wrong

• Why stannous fluoride made a major comeback for gingivitis and sensitivity

• The difference between fluoride uptake testing and enamel solubility reduction

• Why sodium fluoride excels in fluoride uptake but stannous fluoride excels in acid resistance

• How abrasives, zinc salts, pyrophosphates, and calcium ingredients can reduce free fluoride

• Why many modern “fluoride toothpastes” fail availability tests

• The importance of choosing the right fluoride salt for cavities, sensitivity, or gum health

• New 2025 research showing no cognitive harm from regulated water fluoridation

💡 Key Takeaways

• Not all fluoride compounds work the same, and their efficacy depends heavily on formulation.

• MFP is stable with calcium abrasives but requires saliva activation, which reduces performance for dry mouth users.

• Sodium fluoride offers the strongest fluoride uptake but is sensitive to competing ingredients.

• Stannous fluoride provides superior acid resistance and gum health benefits when formulated correctly.

📲 Connect with Dr. Rob (Robert L. Karlinsey, PhD)

🌐 Website: customdentalformulations.com

📄 Research Profile: Robert Karlinsey on ResearchGate

What if the next big breakthrough in enamel repair isn’t a synthetic chemical at all, but peptides pulled straight from sheep’s wool?

Are we on the brink of a breakthrough in enamel repair or just spinning wool into wishful thinking? In this episode of Dental Formulator’s Playbook, Dr. Robert L. Karlinsey and co-host Tami unpack the latest research on wool-derived peptides, keratin, and elastin-like polypeptides as potential tools for enamel remineralization. From the origins of amelogenin to the science of polypeptide assembly and protein templating, they break down the complex biochemistry behind these buzzworthy innovations. But they don’t stop there, the hosts dive deep into formulation hurdles, clinical relevance, and the commercialization landmines that stand in the way of turning lab hype into reality.

🔍 Highlights ↠

• The science behind amelogenin and why it holds the key to enamel formation
• How keratin-derived peptides from sheep’s wool are being explored as a restorative enamel scaffold
• Why beta-sheet vs. alpha-helix structures matter for mineral templating
• The role of hydrophilic and hydrophobic domains in protein-calcium bonding
• Challenges with Curadont and why peptide-based pastes aren’t ready for toothpaste aisles
• Why aqueous vs. non-aqueous solvents can make or break peptide stability
• Deep dive into resin infiltration and how peptide delivery could disrupt this space
• Understanding T-E-G-D-M-A crosslinkers, keratin prep, and hydrogen bonding
• Overview of statherin-inspired peptides and their role in pellicle formation and mineral retention
• Commercialization barriers: patent positioning, formulation pitfalls, and the path from bench to brand

💡 Key Takeaways

• True enamel regrowth remains the holy grail—no current product fully delivers.
• Most protein-based innovations mimic nature, but stability, pH, and formulation compatibility are critical.
• Tooth remineralization isn't just about ingredients—it’s about the delivery system, the science, and the regulations.
• Protein-based oral care has promise, but formulating for real-world use is harder than it looks.

📲 Connect with Dr. Rob (Robert L. Karlinsey, PhD)

🌐 Website: customdentalformulations.com

📄 Research Profile: Robert Karlinsey on ResearchGate

Are your oral-care product claims truly backed by science, or just one regulatory challenge away from collapse?

In this episode of Dental Formulator’s Playbook, Dr. Robert L. Karlinsey and co-host Tami break down the high-stakes world of advertising compliance in oral care. They explore the role of the National Advertising Division (NAD) and show how even established brands can face public scrutiny and legal consequences when claims are not supported by strong scientific evidence.

The episode reviews the well-documented case of Wm. Wrigley Jr. Company vs. Cadbury Adams USA LLC, where germ-killing claims tied to magnolia bark extract (MBE) were challenged and ultimately modified. The conversation connects those lessons to recent study-design pitfalls involving nano-hydroxyapatite (nHAP) toothpaste research and the consequences of using marketing language that outpaces data.

Whether you are a formulator, brand leader, regulatory professional, or marketer, this episode outlines a practical roadmap for building claims that withstand scientific and regulatory scrutiny.

Highlights

What is the NAD?

A self-regulating industry body under BBB National Programs that reviews advertising claims and may refer cases to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) or the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) when non-compliance is identified.

The Wrigley vs. Cadbury case (2009-2010)

Wrigley’s gum containing magnolia bark extract claimed it was “scientifically proven” to kill germs that cause bad breath. The NAD and its appeal board determined the supporting evidence was insufficient and the company ultimately changed its advertising language. Not long after the NAD decision, a class-action lawsuit was brought against Wrigley.

Why real-world testing matters

Dr. Rob examines a 2025 lab study evaluating nano-hydroxyapatite (nHAP) toothpaste, noting weaknesses such as missing negative controls and lack of dose-response structure. Even when literature may support nHAP, weak studies still compromise claims.

Regulatory differences across countries

A toothpaste is classified as a cosmetic in Europe, but in the United States it is considered a drug if it includes fluoride, a crucial distinction for global brands.

Claims = risk

Terms like “scientifically proven,” “clinically validated,” or “kills germs that cause bad breath” require robust, well-controlled evidence or they remain vulnerable to NAD challenges, competitor complaints, FTC action, and class-action lawsuits.

Key Takeaways

Test before you claim: Study design must include negative controls, real-world conditions, and dose-response logic.

One strong randomized controlled trial beats many weak lab experiments.

Know your regulatory category: Fluoride-based products in the US fall under drug status, not cosmetic.

Weak methodology still carries legal exposure even when data exists.

“Natural” or “herbal” branding cannot protect unsupported or misleading claims.

📲 Connect with Dr. Rob (Robert L. Karlinsey, PhD)

🌐 Website: customdentalformulations.com

📄 Research Profile: Robert Karlinsey on ResearchGate

Is “natural” always better—and what exactly is niacinamide doing in your toothpaste?

In this episode of Dental Formulator’s Playbook, Dr. Robert L. Karlinsey and co-host Tami take a critical look at BodyAccel’s oral-care line, focusing on its niacinamide whitening toothpaste and mouthwash. With sharp scientific scrutiny, they expose inconsistencies between ingredient disclosures on BodyAccel’s website and major retailers like Amazon—raising concerns about transparency, labeling accuracy, and regulatory compliance.

They highlight how confusing and contradictory these marketing messages can be for consumers.

This isn’t just a product critique—it’s a masterclass in separating formulation facts from marketing fiction.

🔥 Highlights ↠

🧪 Niacinamide: Whitening Agent or Buzzword?

Dr. Rob explains how niacinamide, while popular in skincare, lacks robust evidence supporting whitening effects in oral care. He discusses possible pH incompatibility with fluoride and its speculative mechanism of action on stains.

🌐 Website vs. Amazon: Ingredient List Inconsistencies

The hosts identify discrepancies between BodyAccel’s official site and Amazon listings—a major compliance and consumer-trust issue.

❌ “Allergy-Free” Claims Debunked

Despite “allergy-friendly” marketing, the products include lactose and lactoferrin—dairy-derived ingredients that contradict those claims.

💧 Fluoride-Free ≠ Safer

While the brand promotes fluoride-free formulas, Dr. Rob explains that removing fluoride without proven alternatives can compromise enamel protection.

🌿 Natural Doesn’t Mean Effective

The team exposes how “natural” is often used as a marketing hook even when evidence is weak or missing.

⚠️ Label Ambiguity = Consumer Risk

The hosts call out the confusion such contradictory labeling creates for average consumers trying to make informed choices.

🧼 Glycerin, Sorbitol & Lactoferrin – Functional or Fluff?

Tami questions whether these ingredients provide tangible benefits or simply pad the label for marketing appeal.

🧪 Safety Without Fluoride – Questionable

Dr. Rob emphasizes that although alternatives are being explored, fluoride remains the gold standard for cavity prevention—and brands must support replacements with data.

🧠 Key Takeaways

• Don’t fall for buzzwords like “natural” or “allergy-free” without reading the full ingredient list.
• Ingredient transparency matters—what’s on the page should match what’s in the tube.
• Let science, not trends, drive formulation.
• Fluoride-free doesn’t automatically mean better—alternatives need validated research.

📲 Connect with Dr. Rob (Robert L. Karlinsey, PhD)

🌐 Website: customdentalformulations.com

📄 Research Profile: Robert Karlinsey on ResearchGate

What happens when top minds in oral biology come together for a deep dive into learning, gum health, and the microbiome?

In this episode of Dental Formulator’s Playbook, Dr. Robert L. Karlinsey and co-host Tami recap key insights from the 82nd Annual American Institute of Oral Biology Meeting in Palm Springs. From gum recession and age-related microbiome shifts to the future of targeted probiotics, this discussion offers a high-level synthesis of emerging science—with practical takeaways for formulators, brands, and clinicians.

Whether you're developing oral-care products, exploring new marketing strategies, or simply curious about what's next in dental science, this is a must-listen.

🔥 Highlights ↠

🧪 Learning & Product Strategy

• Research shows that spaced repetition and quality sleep enhance memory and long-term learning.
• Short, focused R&D sprints (versus prolonged marathons) may yield deeper formulation insights and faster innovation.

🦷 Gum Recession: Surprising Findings

• Upper gum tissue (maxilla) is easier to repair than lower gum tissue (mandible).
• Gum recession can, in some cases, reverse naturally—no grafting required.
• Adults in orthodontic treatment (braces) have an increased risk for gum recession, while teens with orthodontia don’t have an increased risk.
• Men experience higher rates of gum recession than women—a promising opportunity for male-targeted gum-health products.

🧬 Circadian Clocks & the Oral Microbiome

• The human clock and the microbiome clock must stay synchronized for optimal health.
• Oral probiotics may work best before bedtime, when saliva flow slows.
• Timing matters: aligning delivery with circadian rhythms can amplify efficacy.

🧓 Another Variable – Aging Microbiomes

• By age 65+, both men and women undergo significant microbiome shifts that influence oral and systemic health.
• This represents a functional “third phase” of biology, creating formulation needs rarely addressed in current oral-care markets.
• Probiotics tailored for older adults could mark the next major innovation frontier.

📈 Formulation & Marketing Takeaways

• Leverage microbiome research to support product claims and optimize timing.
• Customize formulations by age, gender, and circadian biology for stronger market differentiation.
• Explore new delivery formats—serums, lozenges, sprays—that align with daily biological cycles.

🧠 Key Takeaways

• Product performance depends not only on what’s inside, but when and how it’s delivered.
• Gum-recession dynamics vary by behavior, age, gender, and orthodontic status—there’s no one-size-fits-all solution.
• The future of oral care is personalized, evidence-driven, and synchronized with biological rhythms.

📲 Connect with Dr. Rob (Robert L. Karlinsey, PhD)

🌐 Website: customdentalformulations.com

📄 Research Profile: Robert Karlinsey on ResearchGate

Is your mouthwash truly neutralizing odor-causing compounds—or just giving bad breath a minty disguise?

In this deep-dive episode of Dental Formulator’s Playbook, Dr. Robert L. Karlinsey and co-host Tami go full-on formula forensics, comparing the science behind two leading mouthwash brands: TheraBreath and SmartMouth. From the mechanisms of sodium chlorite and zinc chloride to preservative systems, patent strategy, and flavor chemistry, the duo unpack how formulation choices shape both performance and perception.

Whether you’re a clinician, formulator, or curious consumer tackling chronic halitosis, this episode delivers a data-driven look at what your mouthwash really does—and doesn’t—do.

🔥 Highlights ↠

• TheraBreath’s Formula Breakdown: Dr. Rob dissects every ingredient—including sodium chlorite (stabilized chlorine dioxide), PEG-40 hydrogenated castor oil, and EDTA—and explains how synergy (or its absence) impacts malodor control.
• SmartMouth’s Dual-Chamber Design: Why zinc + sodium chlorite + two-compartment activation may provide a more potent path to neutralizing volatile sulfur compounds (VSCs).
• No FDA Monograph? No Problem: Dr. Rob explains how bad breath remains a cosmetic classification, opening creative space for claims but demanding robust testing to retain credibility.
• The Sensory Science of Mouthfeel: Why TheraBreath tastes “clinical” while SmartMouth balances flavor with glycerin, sodium saccharin, and better masking agents.
• The Role of Preservatives: Hidden preservatives inside flavor systems often go unnoticed—yet they’re vital for microbial stability and consumer safety.
• Critique of Recent Research: A sharp analysis of a 2025 academic paper that relied on oversimplified S. mutans models, overlooking critical formulation variables.
• Patent Power Plays: A look into SmartMouth’s roots in 1990s research and Dr. Kleinberg’s ambitious 397-claim patent—one of the boldest in oral care history.
• Product Claims vs. Clinical Proof: “12-hour” vs. “24-hour” fresh-breath claims—when clinical studies are required, when they’re optional, and how brands navigate regulatory gray zones.

🧠 Key Takeaways

• 🧪 Sodium chlorite and zinc chloride are powerful odor-neutralizers—especially when combined in properly activated formulations.
• 🧾 The FDA does not regulate halitosis as a disease, leaving product claims in a cosmetic gray zone.
• 💡 Effective preservation, pH balance, and ingredient transparency are as crucial as the “hero” ingredients.
• 🥴 A well-formulated mouthwash must work and taste right—flavor and mouthfeel drive consumer compliance.
• 🔬 Clinical and lab testing remain the gold standard—but smart patent strategy and formulation choices set brands apart.

📲 Connect with Dr. Rob (Robert L. Karlinsey, PhD)

🌐 Website: customdentalformulations.com

📄 Research Profile: Robert Karlinsey on ResearchGate