CaviChew vs Dentagum: what each discloses.
Two hydroxyapatite gums, compared only on what each brand publicly discloses: dose, particle data, ingredients, lab documents and guarantee terms. Same rows as the public database this page is generated from.
| What each brand publishes | CaviChew | Dentagum |
|---|---|---|
| Hydroxyapatite per piece | not disclosed | not disclosed |
| Particle form and size | Nano, ≤100 nm rod-shaped (stated) |
Nano particle size not stated
|
| Full ingredient list |
Yes no amounts
|
Yes no amounts
|
| Lab reports public | No |
Partial heavy-metal figures shown; report link not retrievable
|
| Studies cited on site |
No refers to studies on "other remineralizing gums"
|
No "83% / 91% / 87%" shown without sources
|
| Money-back guarantee | not disclosed | 30 days claimed on product page; refund policy states 14 days, unopened |
| Verifiability scorecard | CaviChew | Dentagum |
|---|---|---|
| Dose disclosed | not disclosed | not disclosed |
| Documents downloadable | 0 |
0 a CoA is shown as an on-page image, not downloadable
|
| Guarantee in writing | not found (checked 2026-07-11) |
Conflicting "30-day risk-free" on page; refund policy allows unopened only (EU 14 days)
|
| Reviews verifiable off-site |
Yes Amazon: 193 reviews, 4.3★
|
Yes Amazon: 644 reviews, 4.4★ (site widget claims 733)
|
CaviChew does not publish a per-piece dose, offers 0, and lists its guarantee as not disclosed. Dentagum does not publish a per-piece dose, offers 0, and lists its guarantee as 30 days claimed on product page; refund policy states 14 days, unopened. Every cell above is what each brand states publicly, nothing is scored on taste or opinion; where a cell says not disclosed, the claim could not be verified from the brand’s own materials.
This comparison is generated from the Hydroxyapatite Gum Database, maintained by Minvelle. We sell a gum in this category and appear in the same database under identical rules, which is exactly why every cell here is sourced instead of scored.