Stiftung Warentest Good dental cleaning is also convenient
Stiftung Warentest Good dental cleaning is also convenient

An electric toothbrush for 150 euros, “poor”, a brush for 16 euros, “good”: On price alone, the quality of a toothbrush do not recognize how the Foundation test in your current “test write”-folder. Six of the 13 selected examples of which are tooth brushes made in the testing laboratory is your thing. The best model will cost 220 Euro and it connects with the Smartphone.

A 150 Euro expensive design brush the worst grade gets to the testers, however, for the second Time. You don’t cleans properly and early on the spirit, is the judgment.

The Foundation tested both rotating brushes with a round head, as well as vibrating brush with an elongated head. None of the types of cleans the teeth worse, however, rotating brushes are often a little louder. The testers point out that expensive toothbrushes are also more expensive to operate, are replacement brushes usually cost more, the more expensive the device is. Therefore, consumers should prefer to a large pack that is per piece cheaper.

Cheap No-Name cream of discounters does it well

in Addition, the Foundation also tried toothpaste, and it is expensive is not often better. As a result, consumers can, in the case of the Universal pastes, in good conscience, the cheap No-Name-cream from discount stores to grab the brush. They are almost always “very good”. Specially designed for sensitive teeth imaginary-sensitive pastes cut in older Tests, however, only “good”.

For whiter teeth is recommended to “test” two “very good” products, which are, however, significantly more expensive. Users, however, should not expect miracles, most of the toothpastes only remove stains, such as coffee or tea, and give back the teeth their natural color. Additional colorants, you can only a few hours of lighter work.

three toothpastes advise the testers, because they contain no fluoride. This material protects effectively against caries. For the used spare substances, the protective effect was not sufficiently demonstrated.