Jump to content

Recommended Posts

On advice from our dentist, my 7 year old has been using very small amounts of adult toothpaste for a couple of years. Unfortunately, he absolutely hates the taste of mint which has resulted in avoidance tactics and poor brushing. Does anyone know of a very mild mint to alternative flavour toothpaste that still has a regular amount of flouride (please no discussion on the pros and cons of flouride)?

I have the same mint aversion with my duaghter. I found in the chemist next to the French Cafe a "Punch and Judy" toothpaste (strawberry).

There are some bubblegum flavours around as well .... pound shops often have them with characters on them ... theres a sponge bob one i think ...

On the little strip of shops where the post office / co-op / is .....

Theres the small DIY shop on the corner and Herne Tavern across the road .... if that makes sense!


I cant remember what amount of fluouride the bubblegum ones had .... i have just been desperate to find non mint options!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Enforcement costs money which I doubt the fines actually pay for. Presumably it hasn't been a priority. 
    • Details here: https://www.southwark.gov.uk/2025/dulwich-library-closing-refurbishment
    • Per Cllr McAsh, as quoted above: “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution. " Is anyone au fait with the Clean Air Act 1993, and  particularly with the state of 'Smoke Control' law and practice generally?  I've just been looking  through some of it for the first time and, afaics, the civil penalties mentioned  were introduced into the Clean Air Act, at Schedule 1A, in May 2022.  So it seems that, in this particular,  it's a matter of the enforcement policy trailing well behind the legislation.  I'm not criticising that at all, but am curious.  
    • Here's the part of march46's linked-to Southwark News article pertaining to Southwark Council. "Southwark Council were also contacted for a response. "Councillor James McAsh, Cabinet Member for Clean Air, Streets & Waste said: “One of Southwark’s key priorities is to create a healthy environment for our residents. “To achieve this we closely monitor legislation and measures that influence air pollution – our entire borough apart from inland waterways is designated as a Smoke Control Area, and we also offer substantial provision for electric vehicles to promote alternative fuel travel options and our Streets for People strategy. “We as a council support the work of Mums for Lungs and recognise the health and environmental impacts of domestic solid fuel burning, particularly from wood-burning appliances. “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution.  “This work is being undertaken in collaboration with other London boroughs as part of the pan-London Wood Burning Project, which aims to harmonise enforcement approaches and share best practice across the capital.” ETA: And here's a post I made a few years ago, with tangential relevance.  https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/278140-early-morning-drone-flying/?do=findComment&comment=1493274  
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...