Claims & Evidence

✦

Claims & Evidence

Every claim we make about Lux White, the published research behind it, and what that research actually found.

Teeth whitening is a category full of confident statements and thin evidence. We'd rather show our working.

Below is every substantive claim on our packaging, listings and emails, each with the study it rests on. Where the evidence is strong, we say so. Where it's limited, we say that too — and at the bottom you'll find a list of things we deliberately don't claim, with the reasons why.

All references are peer-reviewed and independently published. None are our own research. Every one can be looked up.

Strength and speed

“44% carbamide peroxide gets you there faster — not further.”

Evidence

Braun A, Jepsen S, Krause F. Spectrophotometric and visual evaluation of vital tooth bleaching employing different carbamide peroxide concentrations. Dental Materials. 2007;23(2):165–169.

What it found
Comparing carbamide peroxide concentrations, the first clearly measurable shade change appeared at day 3 with the stronger gel, against day 7 with a 10% formula.
Also relevant

de Geus JL, Wambier LM, Boing TF, Loguercio AD, Reis A. At-home bleaching with 10% vs more concentrated carbamide peroxide gels: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Operative Dentistry. 2018;43(4):E210–E222. — 13 studies. No significant difference in final whitening efficacy between concentrations.

Where we're careful

We say a stronger gel is faster, and we don't say it ends up whiter. The research is clear that concentrations converge on a similar endpoint; what changes is how long you wait to get there. That's also why our wear time is short — the same review found higher concentrations carry more sensitivity risk, and long wear at high strength buys discomfort rather than colour.

“44% carbamide peroxide, roughly equivalent to 15% hydrogen peroxide.”

Basis

Carbamide peroxide breaks down to release approximately one third of its weight as hydrogen peroxide. 44% × ~0.35 ≈ 15%. Settled chemistry, not a research finding.

Where we're careful

We do not describe this as a “standard” at-home concentration. Most published at-home bleaching research studies 10–22% carbamide peroxide. Ours is a high-concentration formula, which is exactly why the wear time is short and stated clearly on the pack.

“Wearing the trays longer won't whiten faster.”

Evidence

Terra RMO, Sutil E, Ferreira Cordeiro DC, Favoreto MW, Faria-E-Silva A, Best AM, Loguercio AD, Reis A. Different daily times for at-home bleaching with 10% carbamide peroxide: a randomized single-blind, noninferiority controlled trial. Journal of the American Dental Association. 2025;156(1):57–67.

What it found
120 participants, comparing 2, 4 and 8 hours daily wear over 14 days. Colour change was statistically non-inferior across all three durations. Longer wear produced no additional whitening.

The light

“There's no LED light in this kit, because light activation doesn't improve whitening.”

Evidence

Maran BM, Burey A, de Paris Matos T, Loguercio AD, Reis A. In-office dental bleaching with light vs. without light: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Dentistry. 2018;70:1–13.

What it found
A meta-analysis of 21 randomised controlled trials. Light activation did not improve colour change, at any hydrogen peroxide concentration. GRADE certainty: moderate.
Supported by

Hajeer O, Hasan A. In-office tooth bleaching protocols: an umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Saudi Dental Journal. 2026;38(4):39. — An umbrella review of 24 separate systematic reviews reached the same conclusion.

Where we're careful

We say light activation does not reliably improve whitening. Recent work on violet light with low-concentration gels is an open question, based on three trials — too few to be conclusive either way.

Sensitivity

“Potassium nitrate reduces both how often sensitivity occurs during whitening and how intense it feels.”

Evidence

Wang Y, Gao J, Jiang T, Liang S, Zhou Y, Matis BA. Evaluation of the efficacy of potassium nitrate and sodium fluoride as desensitizing agents during tooth bleaching treatment — a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Dentistry. 2015;43(8):913–923.

What it found
Pooled odds ratio for the proportion of patients experiencing sensitivity: 0.45 (95% CI 0.28–0.73). Pooled standardised mean difference for intensity: −0.47 (95% CI −0.77 to −0.18). Both statistically significant. No adverse effect on shade change.
Why this is our lead claim

This meta-analysis studied bleaching patients specifically — our exact use case — rather than sensitivity in general.

“Nano-hydroxyapatite helps with sensitivity.”

Evidence

Vano M, Derchi G, Barone A, Genovesi A, Covani U. Tooth bleaching with hydrogen peroxide and nano-hydroxyapatite: a 9-month follow-up randomized clinical trial. International Journal of Dental Hygiene. 2015;13(4):301–307.

What it found
60 participants. A bleaching gel containing nano-hydroxyapatite produced significantly lower sensitivity (p<0.05) than the same gel without it, with equivalent whitening.
Also

de Melo Alencar C, de Paula BLF, Guanipa Ortiz MI, Baraúna Magno M, Martins Silva C, Cople Maia L. Clinical efficacy of nano-hydroxyapatite in dentin hypersensitivity: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Dentistry. 2019;82:11–21.

Where we're careful

That 2019 meta-analysis studied dentin hypersensitivity generally, not bleaching sensitivity, and found no significant benefit for cold stimuli specifically (SMD −0.17, 95% CI −0.81 to 0.48). It found clear benefits for evaporative and tactile stimuli. We therefore lead our sensitivity claims on potassium nitrate, and treat nano-hydroxyapatite as supporting rather than primary.

The RESTORE+ toothpaste

“Helps remineralise the enamel surface.”

Evidence

Alajlan S, Baysan A. The effect of nano-hydroxyapatite on white spot lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Dentistry. 2024;151:105402.

Wierichs RJ, Wolf TG, Campus G, Carvalho TS. Efficacy of nano-hydroxyapatite on caries prevention — a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clinical Oral Investigations. 2022;26(4):3373–3381.

What they found
Nano-hydroxyapatite improved surface microhardness and mineral gain compared with fluoride alone. Under remineralising conditions in situ, nano-hydroxyapatite performed comparably to sodium fluoride.
Where we're careful

We say helps remineralise the enamel surface, not “rebuilds enamel”. Most of this evidence base is laboratory work rather than human clinical trials, the authors of both reviews describe the certainty of evidence as low, and follow-up periods are short. We think the ingredient is worth including and worth naming. We don't think the evidence supports a dramatic promise.

Enamel safety

“Carbamide peroxide whitening does not soften or damage enamel at studied concentrations.”

Evidence

Zanolla J, Marques A, da Costa DC, de Souza AS, Coutinho M. Influence of tooth bleaching on dental enamel microhardness: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Australian Dental Journal. 2017;62(3):276–282.

What it found
13 studies meta-analysed. No significant change in enamel microhardness following bleaching with 10% carbamide peroxide over 7, 14 or 21 days.
Where we're careful

This research tested 10% carbamide peroxide. It has not been repeated at our concentration. We report what was studied rather than extrapolating from it, which is also why our wear time is shorter than a 10% product's.

What we don't claim, and why

The list that matters most

Anyone can assemble citations that support them. What tells you more about a brand is what it declines to say.

  • We don't claim a stronger gel makes teeth whiter. It makes them whiter sooner. The research shows concentrations converge on a similar endpoint, and we'd rather sell you the speed than pretend it's something else.
  • We don't claim nano-hydroxyapatite whitens teeth. Trials have tested this directly and found no shade advantage. It's in the formula for comfort, not colour.
  • We don't claim it “strengthens enamel” or “supports long-term oral health”. No human clinical trial supports either phrase, and no study we found followed participants beyond nine months.
  • We don't claim to be the strongest kit available. We can't verify what every other product contains.
  • We don't quote a sensitivity percentage. A 2015 systematic review concluded the published figures vary too widely and carry too much risk of bias to state one honestly.
  • We don't tell you to avoid coffee and red wine. Two recent systematic reviews found dietary restriction during whitening made no measurable difference to the final result — even when researchers deliberately increased participants' intake of staining drinks. It's the most repeated advice in this category and the evidence doesn't support it.
  • We don't claim results after one use. Measurable, settled colour change takes days, and continues to shift for a week or two after you finish.
  • We don't have a dentist endorse this product. When we do, they'll be named, their credentials will be visible, and their connection to us will be disclosed.

Questions, or think we've got something wrong?

We'd genuinely like to know. Email info@smilenova.co and a person will answer. If a claim on this page can't be defended, we'll change it.

Last reviewed 15 August 2026. Lux White is for adults only. Not for use during pregnancy or breastfeeding. If you have restorations, gum disease or existing sensitivity, speak to your dentist before whitening.