At a glance

Scandi Gum vs Minvelle, every cell sourced

Swipe sideways on mobile. Scandi Gum cells are quoted from scandigum.com, its policy pages, the Swedish company register as mirrored by allabolag.se and bolagsfakta.se, and uk.trustpilot.com, all read on 1 September 2026. Minvelle cells come from the transparency page. Prices and policies change; check the live pages before buying.

Part 1

Who is behind Scandi Gum, according to the register

Start with the question people type into Google most often, because it has the cleanest answer. The Scandi Gum terms of service name the seller as "The Kybalion AB", at "Lindeborgsgatan 295, Malmo, 21581, Sweden", with company registration number 559433-6785 and a VAT number of SE559433678501. The privacy policy repeats the same company and address, describes it as "the data controller of your personal information", and gives a contact line: "+46 76 850 55 15 or info@scandigum.com". So the seller identifies itself, with an address, a registration number and a phone number, on its own legal pages. That is the baseline any online shop should meet, and Scandi Gum meets it.

The Swedish company register, read through the public aggregators allabolag.se and bolagsfakta.se, which mirror Bolagsverket's data, confirms the entity. The Kybalion AB, organisation number 559433-6785, was registered on 10 May 2023 at that Malmö address, is listed as active, and is registered for VAT and as an employer. The board is listed as Elias Owhaib, board member, and Javid Jabbarli, deputy. The register describes the business as e-commerce and mail order in "teeth whitening products, clothing, accessories, and beauty products". For the financial year 2024 the register shows two employees, revenue of 22,043 KSEK, which is roughly 1.9 million euros, a net result of 3 KSEK, and revenue growth of 242.1 percent over the prior year. We did not access Bolagsverket's own paid portal; the figures above are as mirrored by the two aggregators on 1 September 2026.

Two dates are worth placing next to each other. The company was registered in May 2023. The scandigum.com domain, per the public RDAP record at rdap.org, was registered on 11 October 2025, through Tucows, with an expiry of 11 October 2026. The domain is therefore about eleven months old as we write, while the company behind it is over three years old and was already reporting 2024 revenue of nearly two million euros before the domain existed. Read plainly, that suggests Scandi Gum is a newer product line inside an existing, trading company rather than a company founded around this gum. The register's own business description, which lists clothing, accessories and beauty products alongside teeth whitening, points the same way. We note that as a description of what the register says, not as a statement about how or where the gum is made, because no page we read says that.

Is it Swedish? What the brand's own pages say

The name does a lot of work, so it is fair to check what the brand itself claims about origin. The Our Story page says: "We're a small team based in Europe, obsessed with making oral care that actually delivers on its promises", and later, "we've put our heart, our science, and our Scandinavian standards into every piece." That is the whole of the geography claim. It names no founder nationality, no factory and no country of manufacture. The contact page lists support phone numbers for the UK, the US and Europe, the last of them a Swedish +46 number, and no warehouse or dispatch address. The product-info and disclaimers page that the site structure suggests should exist returned a 404 when we requested it. So the accurate one-line answer to "is Scandi Gum Swedish" is: the company is registered in Sweden, the brand says it is "based in Europe" with "Scandinavian standards", and the pages we read do not state where the gum is manufactured or shipped from. A reader who wants that information will have to ask the company directly, and we would encourage them to.

What we could not establish. We searched for a registered trademark for "Scandi Gum" in the public USPTO and EUIPO search tools available to us and found none, but we could not complete a full database query in either system, so that is a limit of our search, not a finding. We found no Reddit discussion of the brand, no Better Business Bureau profile, which is consistent with the BBB's North American scope and a Swedish seller, and we could not open the Meta Ad Library entry for the brand because that tool blocked automated access. Where we do not know, this review says so.

Part 2

What the product claims, in its own words

The homepage leads with three capitalised promises, "WHITER TEETH", "FRESH BREATH" and "ENAMEL REPAIR", and expands each of them in a line. On whitening: "Naturally whitens teeth, without bleaching and without sensitivity" and "Removes surface stains from coffee, tea, and wine". On breath: "Kills bad breath at the source". On enamel: "Natural cavity protection". And then a fourth promise that no other hydroxyapatite gum we have reviewed makes: "4-hour focused energy from natural caffeine. Zero jitters, zero crash." Scandi Gum is, by its own description, a whitening gum, a breath gum, an enamel gum and an energy gum in a single piece. The brand's TikTok bio, as indexed in search results, goes further still: "Scandi - The World's First Whitening Gum", "Powered by the most advanced premium active ingredients."

We quote all of that at length because the rest of this review is about one question only: which of those sentences comes with a number behind it, and which does not. A claim like "removes surface stains" is checkable against a dose of an abrasive or a chelating agent. "Natural cavity protection" is checkable against a dose of hydroxyapatite and a study at that dose. "4-hour focused energy" is checkable against a milligram figure for caffeine. The product page, as read on 1 September 2026, provides none of those three numbers, and that absence is the single most important fact in this review, so we will return to it slowly.

The ingredients, as the product page lists them

The product page presents seven ingredient callouts, in this order: "Nano-Hydroxyapatite (nHAp)"; "Sodium Phytate & Sodium Hexametaphosphate"; "Zinc Citrate & Zinc Gluconate"; "Xylitol & Erythritol"; "Guarana Extract"; "L-Theanine"; "Vitamin B12". Read as a formula, that is a recognisable design. Hydroxyapatite is the enamel mineral. Sodium hexametaphosphate and sodium phytate are phosphate chelators used in oral care against surface stain and calculus. Zinc salts are the standard breath and plaque actives. Xylitol and erythritol are the sugar-free sweeteners with their own dental literature. Guarana is a plant source of caffeine, L-theanine is the amino acid paired with caffeine in most "calm energy" products, and B12 is a vitamin. Each ingredient family here has a real body of research behind it as a category, and the fairness section below says so again.

What this list is not is a regulatory-format ingredient declaration. It is a marketing callout of seven headline items. We did not find, on any page we read, a full ingredient list of the kind printed on a food or supplement label, with the gum base, flavourings, coatings and the quantities per piece. That is not unusual for a product page, but it matters here because the callouts name actives whose effect depends entirely on how much of them is present, and the page does not say.

Dose, particle size, lab documents: what is and is not disclosed

Dose per piece. The nearest thing to a dose statement for the nano-hydroxyapatite is a phrase in the product page's own text, which describes the hydroxyapatite as the "strongest dose". That is a comparative, and no number accompanies it: no milligrams, no percentage, no per-piece or per-pack figure, on the product page, on the site's dental-chemistry blog post, or on the product-info page, which returned a 404. The same is true for caffeine, zinc, and the phosphates. If you have a reason to care how much of an active you are chewing, whether that reason is enamel, sensitivity, a caffeine limit or a zinc limit, the site does not currently give you the figure to check.

Particle size. Hydroxyapatite in oral care is sold at particle sizes from tens of nanometres to microns, and the size is part of what distinguishes one product's material from another's. Scandi Gum's pages do not publish a particle size. During research we did encounter a specific nanometre range attributed to Scandi Gum on a rival gum brand's blog; because it appears nowhere on scandigum.com, we do not repeat it, and we would caution readers against treating any third-party figure as the brand's own disclosure. The correct statement is simply that Scandi Gum does not publish particle size on its own site as of 1 September 2026.

Lab documents. We looked for a certificate of analysis, a material safety data sheet, or any third-party laboratory report on the product page, the Our Story page, the terms, the privacy policy, the refund policy, the subscription policy, the contact page, the dental-chemistry blog post and the product-info and disclaimers page. We found none, and the last of those pages did not exist. At least one paying customer raised the same gap independently: a Trustpilot reviewer from Denmark, writing on 23 August 2026, describes a "lack of testing transparency for heavy metals or microplastics". We report that as one reviewer's stated concern. We have no evidence about the product's actual contamination profile either way, because there is no published document to read.

The three disclosures this blog asks of every hydroxyapatite gum, dose, particle size and lab paperwork, are the three that are absent here. We say that without adjectives. It is a description of the pages, and the company can change it any day by uploading a document. Our own citation audit of hydroxyapatite gums applies the same three questions across the category, and the pattern it found is that most brands answer at most one of them.

Part 3

The guarantee and the refund policy, side by side

A money-back guarantee is a contract term, so it should be read as one, from both of the places the company publishes it. Below is the guarantee as it appears on the product page and the refund policy as it appears on the refund policy page, both quoted as read on 1 September 2026, with nothing added. The reader can do the comparison.

Both columns quoted verbatim from scandigum.com on 1 September 2026; the product page and the refund policy page are listed in Sources.

The two texts differ on duration and on opened product. That is the whole of our commentary, and it is enough. A buyer deciding whether the guarantee matters to them should read the refund policy page, which is the one that describes the conditions and the procedure, and should note the two points on which it and the product page headline do not say the same thing. If the company reconciles the two texts, we will update this table. For comparison, the Minvelle guarantee is one text in one place: 30 days, unopened boxes.

One thing the refund policy does well deserves saying in the same breath: it discloses the EU 14-day withdrawal right separately and correctly, with its own conditions, rather than folding it into the marketing language. A European buyer's statutory right is stated on the page where it belongs.

Part 4

The efficacy numbers, and where each one comes from

The product page carries four percentage claims about results. Quoted in full: "93% saw visibly whiter teeth in 30 days"; "87% reported long-lasting fresh breath on day one"; "89%" of its customers "reported less sensitive teeth"; "72%" of its customers "said their dentist noticed an improvement". For each of the four, no source is given on the page: no study name, no survey size, no date, no methodology, no link. The phrasing, "reported" and "said", reads like customer-survey language, but that is our reading of the grammar and the page does not say. A reader cannot check any of the four figures against anything, because there is nothing to check them against. We do not say they are wrong. We say they are unsourced on the page where they appear, and that is a different and more precise statement.

Alongside those four numbers, the same page does something better. It states that the ingredient class is supported by "80+ peer-reviewed studies", with PubMed links, and it names the ingredients that literature covers: nano-hydroxyapatite, sodium hexametaphosphate, zinc citrate, xylitol and erythritol. The page's own sentence on hydroxyapatite reads: "Reduces dentin hypersensitivity and produces gradual whitening effect... Clinical literature demonstrates its ability to remineralize early enamel lesions". That is a fair summary of what the hydroxyapatite literature, mostly in toothpaste, has found. The distinction to hold onto is this: the bibliography supports the ingredients as a class, and the four percentage figures are about this finished product. The page places them next to each other. The bibliography does not cite the percentages, and the percentages do not cite the bibliography. Two other lines on the product page follow the same pattern: "hydroxyapatite... Japan has used this for 45 years" appears with no inline citation, and a section header reads "Hydroxyapatite Antibacterial Efficacy (Double-Blind RCT)" while, in the page content we captured, no study title, author, journal or link accompanied that header. If a link exists that our page capture missed, we will add it.

The caffeine claims and their citations

The energy side of the product gets its own blog post on scandigum.com, "how energy gum works", and it is more carefully cited than the product page, so it deserves to be read on its own terms. The post states that energy gum "delivers caffeine 5x faster than drinks" and links that sentence to a PDF in Sheffield Hallam University's research repository, a real academic paper by Morris on caffeine release and absorption from gum. The direction of the claim, that caffeine absorbed through the lining of the mouth from gum reaches the blood faster than caffeine swallowed in a drink, is consistent with that literature. The specific multiplier, five times, is not something we could locate in the text of the source PDF we extracted, so we describe it as a directionally sourced claim whose exact number we could not confirm in the cited document.

The post continues: "a 5-minute chew releases approximately 78% of the caffeine in a piece of gum, and a 10-minute chew pushes that figure to 96%", and separately describes "two caffeine absorption peaks with gum: the fast oral route and a slower secondary GI route". Both sentences are cited to a URL on journals.lww.com whose visible title fragment is a single word, "design". We could not resolve that citation string to a specific article, author, journal issue or PubMed ID. The citation may well point to a real paper; as printed, it cannot be followed, and a citation that cannot be followed cannot be checked.

The third caffeine claim is the one we would most like to see re-sourced. The post states that "participants reached high-focus states 13 to 21% faster when using caffeine gum versus a placebo", and cites that figure to cuindependent.com, which is the student newspaper of the University of Colorado. The post describes the underlying work as a pilot study. A specific numeric efficacy range attributed to a student newspaper's coverage of a pilot study, with no journal, author or PubMed ID given, is a claim whose source type does not match its precision. We name the source type because a reader should know it; a student newspaper is a legitimate publication, and it is not a peer-reviewed journal, and those are simply two different things. The same post's claim that "unlike regular sugar, xylitol cannot be fermented by the bacteria responsible for tooth decay" is cited to a 2008 article in Nutrition Today on the benefits of chewing gum, which is consistent with mainstream dental science and is the kind of citation the rest of the post would benefit from.

To summarise the sourcing honestly: the product page's headline percentages have no source given; the ingredient-class bibliography is real and general; the caffeine post cites one resolvable academic paper, one citation string we could not resolve, and one student newspaper. We found no invented paper, no invented author and no invented PubMed ID. This is not that. It is the more common pattern of a page that cites something, where the something supports the ingredient or the direction but not the specific sentence and number it sits under. Our citation audit describes the same pattern across the hydroxyapatite gum category and explains how to spot it in thirty seconds on any product page.

Part 5

Trustpilot: the score, the count, and what the one-star reviews say

Scandi Gum's Trustpilot page, at uk.trustpilot.com, showed 275 reviews and an overall score of 4.0 out of 5 when we read it on 1 September 2026. The distribution was 59 percent five-star, 17 percent four-star, 3 percent three-star, 3 percent two-star and 18 percent one-star. Two things about that shape are worth stating before any individual review is quoted. First, 275 reviews is a real sample for a brand whose domain is eleven months old; it is not the handful of reviews a brand-new shop typically has. Second, the distribution has a substantial one-star segment sitting next to a large five-star majority. A profile made up almost entirely of five-star reviews is the shape that invites questions; a profile with 18 percent of reviewers at one star is the shape of a real, mixed customer base. The 4.0 looks like an ordinary average of satisfied buyers and unhappy ones, and we read it as such.

What makes the one-star segment informative is that its complaints cluster. The dominant theme among the one-star reviews posted in August 2026 is subscription enrollment the reviewer says they did not ask for. A reviewer writing on 30 August 2026: "No subscription requested but set up anyway... it was turned into a subscription without my knowledge." A reviewer from Denmark writing on 25 August 2026 describes placing "a simple, ONE TIME order a month ago" and then being charged 949 Danish kroner for a monthly subscription they say was not disclosed to them; the same reviewer says the company then sent a replacement order by express courier rather than issuing a refund. We report those as the reviewers' accounts; we have not seen the order records and the company's side is not on the page. A separate one-star review from 29 August 2026 concerns the product itself rather than billing: "Very disappointing experience... I cannot even comfortably drink water because of the strong burning sensation". And the reviewer from Denmark quoted earlier, on 23 August 2026, raised the "lack of testing transparency for heavy metals or microplastics", which is the same documentation gap this review found on the site.

The subscription theme is the one a prospective buyer can act on, because the subscription policy page explains the mechanics, and we quote it in the next section. If several August 2026 reviewers say a one-time purchase became a recurring one, the practical response is to read the order summary at checkout with more than usual care, and to know the cancellation route before the first renewal date. We found no Reddit threads discussing the brand, so Trustpilot is the only public review record we can point to, and we would rather point to a page with 275 dated, individually readable reviews than to none.

The fairness section: what Scandi Gum gets right

A review written by a competitor owes the brand its due, and the record supports several points in Scandi Gum's favour. The legal entity is real, active and locatable, with a registration number, a street address and named board members, and it was trading and reporting revenue of roughly 1.9 million euros for 2024 before the Scandi Gum domain existed. The ingredient science it points to is real: the literature on hydroxyapatite, phosphate chelators, zinc salts, xylitol and erythritol as a class is mainstream dental research, not fringe material, and the page says so with a bibliography rather than a slogan. The EU 14-day withdrawal right is disclosed correctly and separately in the refund policy. The Trustpilot profile shows a normal-looking mix of satisfied and dissatisfied buyers rather than a wall of identical praise. The contact page publishes regional support phone numbers with hours for the UK, the US and Europe, which many small online shops do not. And, a point that matters in this category specifically, we found no evidence connecting Scandi Gum to the cluster of storefronts that resell or imitate Underbrush gum: Nathan & Sons, the maker of Underbrush, keeps a public list of storefronts and TikTok shops it considers imitations, and neither Scandi Gum, scandigum.com nor The Kybalion AB appears on it. Scandi Gum's formula and positioning, caffeine energy plus whitening, are also materially different from that cluster's. Readers who want that comparison can see how we handled the original in our Minvelle vs Underbrush piece.

Part 6

The subscription terms, quoted from the policy

On the product page the subscription is advertised in two phrases: "30% off, forever" and "Cancel, skip or edit anytime", with monthly, bi-monthly and quarterly delivery intervals. The subscription policy page gives the mechanics. On how it works: "you select a delivery interval that suits your needs. The Kybalion AB will then automatically place and ship the same order at your chosen interval." On billing: charges occur "the day the order is created and sent to the warehouse for processing". On price: "prices may change and are not locked in". On cancelling: through your account or by emailing support@scandigum.com, with this condition: "If a renewal order has already been processed, the cancellation will take effect after that order has been completed." On pausing: allowed "between 1 and 8 weeks". On withdrawal: EU customers have the 14-day right on the first subscription order only, for unopened product.

Put the two pages next to each other and the reader has what they need. "30% off, forever" describes the discount percentage; "prices may change and are not locked in" describes the base price the percentage is applied to. "Cancel anytime" describes the right; "after that order has been completed" describes the timing when a renewal has already been generated. None of that is unusual for subscription commerce. It is worth knowing before rather than after the first renewal, particularly in light of the August 2026 Trustpilot theme, and the policy page is short enough to read in two minutes.

For comparison, and only because a reader will ask: the Minvelle subscription is €29.99 every four weeks, skip or cancel anytime, and the refund on unopened boxes is 30 days. We do not discount subscriptions and we do not claim a price is locked for life, because our contracts do not work that way either. Every subscription has terms; the useful habit is to read them on the policy page rather than the banner.

Part 7

What the science says about hydroxyapatite in gum, and what it does not yet say

Hydroxyapatite is the calcium phosphate mineral that makes up most of tooth enamel, and the synthetic nano-sized form has been studied in oral care for decades, first in Japan and then in Europe. The research that built its reputation is overwhelmingly toothpaste research: clinical trials in which a hydroxyapatite toothpaste was compared with a fluoride toothpaste or a placebo for remineralising early enamel lesions, reducing dentine hypersensitivity, and controlling caries in children and adults. Scandi Gum's product page is right that "clinical literature demonstrates its ability to remineralize early enamel lesions". That literature is what every hydroxyapatite product, gum or paste, stands on.

What that literature does not yet contain is a comparable body of trials on hydroxyapatite delivered in chewing gum. Gum is a plausible vehicle: chewing raises saliva flow, saliva is the fluid that carries calcium and phosphate to the enamel surface, and a mineral active released into that saliva over a chew has a mechanism to work with. But plausibility is not a trial result, and a brand that says its gum performs like the toothpaste studies is extrapolating, whether the brand is Scandi Gum or Minvelle. The honest posture for this whole category is to say what the toothpaste evidence shows, to say that gum-specific trials are few, and to publish the dose so that anyone, including a dentist, can judge whether the amount in a piece bears any relation to the amounts studied. We keep the category evidence, the toothpaste trials and the gum-specific gaps, in one place in our remineralizing chewing gum tested and compared guide, and we would rather send a reader there than cite a paper out of context here.

One consequence of the dose question is specific to Scandi Gum's format. The product combines hydroxyapatite with caffeine from guarana and advertises "4-hour focused energy". Caffeine has well-known daily intake guidance, and a person managing their intake needs a milligram figure per piece to count it. The page does not give one. The same applies to zinc, which has an upper intake level and is present here as two salts. None of this is an argument about whether those ingredients belong in a gum. It is the plain observation that when a product stacks several actives that each carry an intake consideration, the per-piece numbers are the information a buyer most needs, and they are the information that is not there.

Part 8

How to evaluate any nano-hydroxyapatite gum in four questions

1. What is the dose per piece, in milligrams? Not "strongest", not "clinically dosed", not a percentage of the formula with no piece weight to apply it to. A number, per piece, on a page you can link to. If the number is not there, the whitening, enamel and sensitivity sentences on the page cannot be connected to the product, however good the ingredient's literature is. This is the first question because it decides whether the other three are answerable.

2. What is the particle size? Hydroxyapatite is sold from nano to micron scale, and different materials behave differently in saliva and on the enamel surface. A brand that has specified its material knows its particle size, because the supplier's certificate states it. Ask for the figure and the document it comes from. Do not accept a figure quoted on somebody else's website as the brand's disclosure; we declined to repeat one such figure in this review for exactly that reason.

3. Where are the documents? A certificate of analysis for the active, a safety data sheet, and ideally a third-party test for contaminants such as heavy metals. These exist for any manufactured ingredient; publishing them costs a PDF upload. When a brand does not publish them, the fair inference is not that something is wrong with the product, it is that you cannot check, and "cannot check" is the state a buyer should be aware of before paying a premium for an active.

4. What does the refund policy page say, not the banner? Read the policy page for duration, for the treatment of opened product, for who pays return shipping, and for subscription renewal timing. Where a brand publishes a guarantee in two places, read both and note where they differ. A guarantee you can only use on an unopened box is a shipping-damage policy, not a results policy, and that is fine as long as you know which one you are buying under.

Applied to Scandi Gum on 1 September 2026, those four questions return: not published; not published; not found; two texts that differ on duration and on opened product. Applied to any other gum, including ours, they should return four links. That is the entire method of this review series, and it is deliberately one a reader can run without our help.

Part 9

Where Minvelle fits, by the same four questions

We are the competitor writing this, so here is our own product held to the same list, with the source being our transparency page rather than our marketing. Dose: 5.7 mg of nano-hydroxyapatite per piece, published on the transparency page. Particle size: 200 nm rods, published on the same page. Documents: the certificate of analysis and the material safety data sheet are public there. Refund: 30 days on unopened boxes, stated once. Format: 18 pieces per box, one piece a day, €24.99 for a single box or €29.99 every four weeks on subscription, skip or cancel anytime.

What Minvelle is not: it is not a caffeine product, it is not a whitening product in the stain-removal sense, and it does not claim four hours of anything. It is a one-piece-a-day enamel gum built around a single published active, meant as a complement to fluoride brushing, never a replacement. If what you want is energy and whitening and breath in one piece, Scandi Gum's formula is designed for that and ours is not, and you should evaluate it with the four questions above and your own dentist. If what you want is a hydroxyapatite gum whose dose, particle size and paperwork you can read before you buy, that is the product we built, and the page that proves it is linked in every article on this blog.

We do not run a contest over whose nano is purer or whose particles are smaller; the argument of this review is not that a particular number is best, it is that a number should be published so a reader and a dentist can evaluate it. Scandi Gum could join that standard tomorrow with one page, and if it does, this review will say so at the top.

Questions, answered

The things people actually ask