Survey of Adult Fluoridated Toothpaste (AFT) in Malaysia (March 1999)

Background Samples surveyed
Results Conclusions
Graphics Press Release
Editorial Voice Letter To Editor

Samples surveyed:

  1. No. of AFT Brands Surveyed: 10
  2. No. of AFT Types Surveyed: 17

All samples inspected are those made for the Malaysian or registered market only. Six regular oulets in major cities of Penang, Ipoh and Kuala Lumpur were visited for this purpose.


Comparison on availability of information between locally-made AFT (including those made overseas for Malaysia market) 12 months after the directive to label were issues on 26 February 1998 by the Drug Control Authority (DCA).

Samples*123456 7 8910
  Information found on the accompanying boxes **
  a.  Active Ingredients
  b.  Other Ingredients
  c.  General Use***
  d.  Use In Children***
  e.  Note On Parenteral
  f.  Warnings***
  g.  Pictogram***
  h.  Expiry Date
  i.  Registration No.

Brand of samples no. 3,8,9,10 had more than one types, making a total of 17 types surveyed. The level of information found on the different types however are representative of the one reported in the table above.
There were fewer and less detailed information found in all the tubes (see also Conclusions, no.5) as compared to the respective accompanying boxes.
Information (c-g) as required by the DCA Directives.
Strength of active ingredients not indicated.
Active ingredients not indicated as such, and their strengths were also not indicated.


  1. Only one (1) AFT of those surveyed (n=17) carried the additional label as directed by the DCA. This one sample was found in only one (1) of the 6 outlets inspected. However, other types with the same brand name did not carry the directives.
  2. Generally there are no signifant changes in the information level and content found as compared to the previous survey carried out on the same range of AFT brands and types between April to November 1997.
  3. Two leading brands types continued to carry the Malaysian Dental Association (MDA) endorsement logos and claims. Only one (1) of the types for the two brands endorsed carried the DCA additional labelling. At least four others did not.
  4. Four (4) AFT carried 'advertisements' about special free gifts on one entire side of the box. All of them had not labels as directed.
  5. Generally, all the tubes of AFT carried even less information (except for sample no.1) as compared to that found on the boxes. Sample no.1 has the most information on the tube (including active ingredient and registration number). All other tubes carried only indication of batch numbers and few other detailed information.


  1. Graphic A shows the one toothpaste (sample 10) that is labelled as directed by DCA and also carrys the MDA endorsement. See also Conclusion number 3 above.


  2. Graphic B also carrys MDA endorsement but not DCA directives as mentioned in Conclusions number 1 & 3 above. Instead it carrys and advertisement for free gift (a glass plate).

    B - Free gift: 9" Glass Plate

  3. Graphics C,D & E show more examples of advertisements on the box but without the DCA directives.

    C - Free gift: 5" Glass Bowl

    D - Free gift: A Decorative Glass

    E - Free gift: A Chrome Plated Spoon

    F - Free gift: A Decorative Glass

    Source: National Poison Centre (PRN), Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang, March 1999