What Is the Hello Toothpaste Lawsuit?
The Hello toothpaste lawsuit is a group of separate consumer cases against Colgate-Palmolive and its Hello brand, not one case. The most active is Browne v. Colgate-Palmolive Co., a consolidated class action over alleged lead and mercury in Hello Kids toothpaste. Judge J. Paul Oetken presides over it in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, No. 1:25-cv-05698.
Three other matters share the Hello name. A charcoal toothpaste class action settled in 2023. A Hello Kids Fluoride Rinse case is pending in Illinois. A sweetener-labeling case went back to an Illinois state court in 2025.
Hello Products LLC was the original defendant in the lead case. Hello Products LLC was dissolved in September 2024, and a court filing says its assets and liabilities passed to Colgate-Palmolive Company. Colgate is now named as its successor-in-interest.
“Plaintiff commences this class action to stop Defendant’s deceptive, unfair, and unsafe business practice of manufacturing, distributing, advertising, marketing, and selling its toothpaste products which contain or risk containing dangerously high levels of heavy metals like lead and mercury. The products at issue are all of Defendant’s Hello-branded toothpastes, including without limitation Hello Kids Dragon Dazzle Toothpaste and Hello Kids Fluoride Free Toothpaste Fresh Watermelon (the “Products”).”
Source: Browne v. Hello Products LLC, No. 25-cv-05698 (S.D.N.Y.), Class Action Complaint, Doc. 1, paragraph 1 (filed July 10, 2025)
Why Are People Filing Hello Toothpaste Lawsuits?
People are filing Hello toothpaste lawsuits because parents and shoppers say Hello's labels did not match what the products contained or how safely they could be used. The claims fall into four groups: heavy metals, fluoride rinse safety, charcoal whitening claims and sweetener claims.
The lead cases rest on a simple theory. Plaintiffs say a children's toothpaste sold with a list of ingredients it does not contain should also disclose any detectable lead. The Barton complaint says families would not have bought the toothpaste had they known.
Colgate contests the pending claims in court. It moved to dismiss the lead case in June 2026 and answered the amended rinse complaint the same month. In the charcoal case, Hello claimed no wrongdoing, according to ABC15, and settled to resolve the claims.
What Injuries Are Included in the Hello Toothpaste Lawsuit?
The Hello toothpaste lawsuit includes six distinct categories of alleged injury. The pleadings reviewed describe exposure risk and lost purchase money rather than diagnosed illness. Each category below matches a claim pleaded in a specific case.
Lead Exposure
Lead is a naturally occurring metal that can affect brain development in young children.
The Barton complaint alleges independent laboratory testing found lead in every Hello Kids toothpaste flavor it tested. It reports 658 parts per billion in Wild Strawberry and 440 in Unicorn Sparkle. The other results were 411 in Dragon Dazzle, 268 in Smiling Shark, 245 in Magical Mermaid and 236 in Fresh Watermelon. The laboratory used inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry in April, August and September 2025.
The Browne complaint cites separate testing by the consumer group Lead Safe Mama. That testing reports 493 parts per billion of lead in Fresh Watermelon and 428.4 in Dragon Dazzle. The Barton complaint rests on California consumer law. It uses the FDA's 100 parts per billion guidance for candy as a comparison, not a legal limit.
Mercury Exposure
Mercury is a metal that can affect the nervous system, and public water limits for it are set very low.
Only the Browne action alleges mercury. Its complaint reports 19 parts per billion in Hello Kids Fluoride Free Fresh Watermelon and 11.8 in Dragon Dazzle. The complaint compares those figures with the EPA's 2 parts per billion drinking water limit.
Browne frames mercury as a risk of exposure rather than a proven injury. The Barton complaint does not allege mercury at all.
Misleading Product Claims
A misleading product claim is a label or ad statement that leads a reasonable shopper to a false belief about what a product contains or does.
Plaintiffs in Barton and Browne plead lost money, not bodily injury. The Barton class excludes anyone who claims personal injury from using the products. Barton says the Hello Kids boxes tout a list of ingredients the product does not contain, so shoppers expected a premium toothpaste free of harmful elements.
Browne pleads New York General Business Law sections 349 and 350 and breach of express warranty. Barton pleads California's Unfair Competition Law, False Advertising Law and Consumers Legal Remedies Act.
Fluoride Overexposure From Kids' Rinse
Dental fluorosis is a change in the look of tooth enamel caused by taking in too much fluoride while teeth are still forming.
The Cook case concerns Hello Kids Fluoride Rinse, not toothpaste. Plaintiffs allege the FDA treats fluoride mouthrinses as not indicated for children under six, yet Hello sold the rinse in a bubble gum flavor with child-focused packaging. Judge Andrea R. Wood summarized the allegation that young children can swallow toxic amounts of fluoride from rinses.
The Cook plaintiffs are parents who bought the rinse for children under six. They assert claims under the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act and similar state laws.
Charcoal Enamel Wear
Tooth enamel is the hard outer layer of a tooth, and wear on it can leave teeth more prone to stains and cavities.
The Aguirre class action alleged Hello falsely advertised its black activated charcoal toothpaste as safe and effective for whitening. Consumer Action's summary says the charcoal may erode tooth enamel. ABC15 reported that a 2017 American Dental Association study found insufficient data to support charcoal safety and efficacy claims.
The settlement set packaging limits on unsupported charcoal claims for two years after the court's January 10, 2023 final order.
Undisclosed Artificial Sweeteners
An artificial sweetener is a manufactured sugar substitute, and a "no artificial sweeteners" label tells shoppers a product contains none.
The Flaherty complaint alleges Hello toothpastes marketed with "no artificial sweeteners" actually contain sorbitol and xylitol. It pleads common law fraud, unjust enrichment and violations of the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act. Plaintiff Norah Flaherty seeks damages and an injunction for a nationwide class and an Illinois subclass.
Who Qualifies for the Hello Toothpaste Lawsuit?
You may qualify if:
- You bought a Hello Kids toothpaste named in a pending complaint, such as Fresh Watermelon, Dragon Dazzle, Unicorn Sparkle, Wild Strawberry, Smiling Shark or Magical Mermaid.
- You bought it in a state covered by a proposed class, which was New York in the original Browne complaint and California in the Barton complaint.
- You bought Hello Kids Fluoride Rinse for a child under six, which is the group the Cook plaintiffs describe.
You may not qualify if:
- You claim personal injury from using the product, because the Barton class definition excludes people who claim bodily injury.
- Your only purchase was Hello charcoal toothpaste, because that settlement's claims deadline passed in 2022.
- You bought outside every proposed class definition, which this page could not confirm for the April 2026 consolidated amended complaint.
No court has certified a class in the pending Hello cases, and no claims process exists today. Whether you qualify generally depends on your state, product and purchase dates, and only a qualified attorney reviewing your records can confirm it.
What Is the Current Status of the Hello Toothpaste Lawsuit?
The Hello toothpaste lawsuit is still pending in two federal courts, with no settlement and no certified class. That reflects the latest docket entries reviewed, from August 2026. The four cases below sit at different stages.
Browne v. Colgate-Palmolive Co.
Browne is the lead case in the consolidated Hello toothpaste heavy metals action. Judge Oetken consolidated Nelkin into Browne on February 25, 2026 and Barton on March 12, 2026, for all purposes including discovery and trial. Barton began in California and moved to New York after a February 27, 2026 transfer order.
| Court | U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York |
| Case Number | 1:25-cv-05698-JPO, consolidated with 1:26-cv-01434 (Nelkin) and 1:26-cv-01931 (Barton) |
| Judge | J. Paul Oetken |
| Filed | July 10, 2025 |
| Defendant | Colgate-Palmolive Company, individually and as successor-in-interest to Hello Products LLC |
| Claims (original complaint) | New York General Business Law sections 349 and 350, breach of express warranty |
| Consolidated Amended Complaint | April 10, 2026 |
| Motion to Dismiss | Filed June 11, 2026; reply filed August 6, 2026 |
| Class Certification | None sought or decided in the records reviewed |
Colgate moved to dismiss the amended complaint on June 11, 2026. No ruling on that motion appeared in the docket entries reviewed. An October 2025 order shows the parties had agreed to defer discovery while the motion was expected.
Cook v. Colgate-Palmolive Co.
Cook is a proposed class action over Hello Kids Fluoride Rinse. On March 27, 2026, Judge Andrea R. Wood denied Colgate's motion to dismiss Cook, along with the related Harden mouthrinse case. Colgate answered the amended complaint on June 23, 2026.
| Court | U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division |
| Case Number | 1:25-cv-05448 |
| Judge | Andrea R. Wood, with pretrial referral to Magistrate Judge Daniel P. McLaughlin |
| Filed | May 15, 2025 |
| Earlier Case | Miller v. Hello Products, LLC, No. 3:25-cv-00071 (S.D. Cal.), voluntarily dismissed April 23, 2025 |
| Product | Hello Kids Fluoride Rinse |
| Latest Docket Activity | Telephonic status hearing held July 10, 2026 |
The court held status hearings on April 28 and July 10, 2026. Nothing in the entries reviewed shows a class certification motion or a trial date.
Aguirre v. Hello Products, LLC
The charcoal toothpaste class action is resolved. The court certified a settlement class, approved the settlement and dismissed the case with prejudice in a final order dated January 10, 2023.
| Court | U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York |
| Case Number | 1:19-cv-09577-SDA |
| Judge | Stewart D. Aaron, U.S. Magistrate Judge |
| Filed | October 16, 2019 |
| Lead Plaintiffs | Sarah Patellos and Eric Fishon, later captioned under Shannon Russell Aguirre |
| Class Counsel | Federman & Sherwood and Pastor Law Office, LLP |
| Claims Administrator | Simpluris, Inc. |
| Preliminary Approval | June 15, 2022 |
| Claims Deadline | October 11, 2022 (passed) |
| Final Approval | January 10, 2023 (Doc. 87) |
The court awarded class counsel $420,000 in attorneys' fees from the settlement fund. It recorded no valid objections or exclusions, and the case is closed to new claims.
Flaherty v. Hello Products LLC
The sweetener-labeling case returned to state court in 2025, and no later ruling was found. Judge Martha M. Pacold remanded it to the Circuit Court of Cook County on March 31, 2025, after finding the federal court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction.
| Court | U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois, remanded to the Circuit Court of Cook County |
| Case Number | 1:23-cv-01990 |
| Judge | Martha M. Pacold |
| Federal Docket Opened | March 29, 2023 |
| Claims | Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act, common law fraud, unjust enrichment |
| Product Claim | "No artificial sweeteners" on Hello toothpastes |
| Current Status | Remanded; no state court ruling found |
The remand order denied Hello's pending motion to dismiss as moot, so the court never decided the sweetener claims on the merits.
How Much Is the Hello Toothpaste Lawsuit Payout?
The Hello toothpaste lawsuit payout was about $6 per product in the only settled case, and no payout exists in the pending cases. The charcoal settlement capped claims at five products without proof of purchase and ten with proof, and each household could file one claim.
Payments were pro rata, so the final amount depended on how many valid claims the administrator approved. Hello's total potential contribution was $1,500,000, and the claims deadline was October 11, 2022. Browne and Cook are proposed class actions with no certified class, no settlement fund and no claims deadline.
The administrator received 385,075 claims by the charcoal deadline and reduced them to 129,039 valid claims after removing fraudulent submissions. The court's final order also awarded $420,000 in fees to class counsel.
No payout date exists for the lead case. The court docket shows no settlement talks, and Colgate's motion to dismiss was still undecided in the entries reviewed.
Hello Toothpaste Lawsuit Updates and Case Status
Here is the current status of the Hello Toothpaste lawsuit, updated with new filings, rulings, and case-count reports as they're confirmed. No settlement date has been set as of October 2026; the consolidated Browne v. Colgate-Palmolive heavy metals class action remains in active pretrial litigation. Every verified development is listed in the timeline below, in order.
Hello Toothpaste Lawsuit Timeline of Events
Colgate files its reply in the Browne dismissal motion
Colgate-Palmolive filed its reply memorandum in Browne v. Colgate-Palmolive Co. on August 6, 2026. The filing completed briefing on the company's motion to dismiss the consolidated Hello toothpaste heavy metals complaint in the Southern District of New York.
Plaintiffs oppose dismissal in Browne
The consolidated plaintiffs in Browne v. Colgate-Palmolive Co. filed their opposition memorandum on July 16, 2026. They asked Judge J. Paul Oetken to deny Colgate's motion to dismiss.
Judge Wood holds a status hearing in Cook
Judge Andrea R. Wood held a telephonic status hearing in Cook v. Colgate-Palmolive Co. on July 10, 2026. The case concerns Hello Kids Fluoride Rinse in the Northern District of Illinois.
Colgate answers the amended Cook complaint
Colgate-Palmolive filed its answer to the amended complaint in Cook v. Colgate-Palmolive Co. on June 23, 2026. The Hello Kids Fluoride Rinse case moved toward discovery after the court denied dismissal in March.
Colgate moves to dismiss the Browne complaint
Colgate-Palmolive moved to dismiss the amended complaint in Browne v. Colgate-Palmolive Co. on June 11, 2026. The motion targets the consolidated Hello toothpaste heavy metals claims in the Southern District of New York.
Consolidated amended complaint filed in Browne
Plaintiffs filed the consolidated amended complaint in Browne v. Colgate-Palmolive Co. on April 10, 2026. It combines the Browne, Nelkin and Barton plaintiffs against Colgate-Palmolive as successor to Hello Products LLC.
Court denies dismissal of the Hello Kids rinse claims
Judge Andrea R. Wood denied Colgate's motions to dismiss the Cook and Harden mouthrinse cases on March 27, 2026. The Northern District of Illinois opinion left the Hello Kids Fluoride Rinse claims in place.
Barton consolidated into Browne
Judge J. Paul Oetken consolidated Barton v. Colgate-Palmolive Co., No. 1:26-cv-01931, into Browne on March 12, 2026. The order covers all purposes and extended the amended complaint deadline to April 10, 2026.
California court transfers Barton to New York
The Southern District of California granted a motion to change venue in Barton v. Colgate-Palmolive Co. on February 27, 2026. The Hello Kids toothpaste lead case then opened in the Southern District of New York.
Nelkin consolidated into Browne
Judge J. Paul Oetken consolidated Nelkin v. Colgate-Palmolive Co., No. 1:26-cv-01434, into Browne on February 25, 2026. Browne became the lead case because it carries the lowest case number.
Colgate's new pea-sized toothpaste visuals take effect
Colgate-Palmolive agreed that from November 1, 2025, its Colgate, Tom's of Maine and hello fluoride toothpastes for children under six would show pea-sized amounts on packaging and marketing. The change followed the Texas Attorney General's investigation.
Barton files a Hello Kids lead class action in California
Nathan Barton and Cynthia Fahrnkopf sued Colgate-Palmolive in the Southern District of California on October 22, 2025. They allege lab testing found lead in every flavor of Hello Kids toothpaste they tested.
Browne court pauses scheduling pending a dismissal motion
The Southern District of New York adjourned the initial conference in Browne v. Hello Products LLC on October 16, 2025. The order cited Hello's expected motion to dismiss and the parties' agreement to defer discovery.
Texas Attorney General announces a Colgate agreement
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton announced an agreement with Colgate-Palmolive on September 15, 2025. It covers Colgate, Tom's of Maine and hello fluoride toothpastes for children under six and ended his packaging investigation.
Nelkin sues Hello Products in California
Tal Nelkin sued Hello Products LLC in the Central District of California on July 24, 2025, under No. 2:25-cv-06770. A Nelkin case later appeared in New York and was consolidated into Browne.
Damany Browne sues Hello Products over heavy metals
Damany Browne filed a New York class action against Hello Products LLC on July 10, 2025. The complaint alleges Hello-branded toothpastes contain or risk containing lead and mercury.
Cook files the Hello Kids Fluoride Rinse case in Illinois
Josh Cook filed Cook v. Colgate-Palmolive Co. in the Northern District of Illinois on May 15, 2025. It targets Hello Kids Fluoride Rinse and followed a California case the same plaintiffs dropped.
Plaintiffs dismiss the California Hello rinse case
Josh Cook, Amber Miller and Marina Vasilyeva voluntarily dismissed Miller v. Hello Products, LLC in the Southern District of California on April 23, 2025. Hello had moved to dismiss their second amended complaint on April 16.
Federal court remands the Flaherty sweetener case
Judge Martha M. Pacold remanded Flaherty v. Hello Products LLC to the Circuit Court of Cook County on March 31, 2025. She found the federal court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction over the "no artificial sweeteners" claims.
California plaintiffs sue Hello over its kids' fluoride rinse
Miller v. Hello Products, LLC was filed in the Southern District of California on January 13, 2025. Plaintiffs Amber Miller, Josh Cook and Marina Vasilyeva sued on behalf of buyers of Hello Kids Fluoride Rinse for preschool children.
Hello Products LLC is dissolved into Colgate-Palmolive
Hello Products LLC was dissolved in September 2024, and its assets and liabilities were assigned to Colgate-Palmolive Company. Hello's counsel disclosed this in a notice filed in Flaherty v. Hello Products LLC.
Colgate recalls mislabeled Hello Wild Strawberry toothpaste
Colgate-Palmolive announced a voluntary nationwide recall of some hello Wild Strawberry Fluoride Toothpaste on August 10, 2023. Some tubes were mislabeled as Fresh Watermelon Fluoride-Free and lacked the required fluoride warnings.
Flaherty reaches federal court
Flaherty v. Hello Products LLC appears on the Northern District of Illinois docket from March 29, 2023. The plaintiff alleges Hello's "no artificial sweeteners" claim is false because the toothpastes contain sorbitol and xylitol.
Court finally approves the Hello charcoal toothpaste settlement
The Southern District of New York entered a final order and judgment in Aguirre v. Hello Products, LLC on January 10, 2023. It approved the settlement, awarded fees to class counsel and dismissed the charcoal case with prejudice.
Charcoal settlement claims deadline passes
The claims deadline in the Aguirre v. Hello Products, LLC charcoal toothpaste settlement was October 11, 2022. The administrator later reported 385,075 claims received.
Court preliminarily approves the charcoal settlement
The court preliminarily approved the Aguirre v. Hello Products, LLC charcoal toothpaste settlement on June 15, 2022. It provisionally certified a settlement class of all purchasers from product launch through that date.
Parties report a charcoal settlement in principle
The Southern District of New York dismissed the charcoal toothpaste case without prejudice on December 17, 2021, after the parties reported they had settled in principle. The court reopened it in January 2022 to approve a class settlement.
Colgate agrees to acquire the Hello oral care brand
Colgate-Palmolive agreed in January 2020 to acquire Hello Products LLC, the maker of hello toothpaste. Colgate is now named as Hello's successor-in-interest in the pending New York case.
Charcoal toothpaste class action filed in New York
The charcoal toothpaste case, later captioned Aguirre v. Hello Products, LLC, was filed in the Southern District of New York on October 16, 2019. It alleged Hello falsely advertised its black activated charcoal toothpaste.
How to File a Hello Toothpaste Lawsuit
To file a Hello Toothpaste lawsuit, review and follow the 5 steps below.
- Identify your product: Hello Kids toothpaste, Hello Kids Fluoride Rinse, charcoal toothpaste and sweetener claims follow different cases, so match your purchase to the right one first.
- Check which cases are open: The charcoal settlement's claims window has closed, while Browne and Cook are still pending with no claims process.
- Gather your purchase records: Collect receipts, online order history, photos of the tube or box, the flavor, and the lot code and UPC where visible.
- Consult an attorney: Only a qualified consumer attorney can review your records and say whether you fit a proposed class or have an individual claim.
- Act before deadlines run: State consumer protection and warranty claims carry statutes of limitations that vary by state, so waiting can end a claim.
Answer a few questions and a case reviewer will follow up. Free, no obligation.
A case reviewer will follow up soon.
What Evidence Do I Need for a Hello Toothpaste Lawsuit?
The evidence needed for a Hello toothpaste lawsuit centers on proof of purchase. Receipts and online order histories show which product you bought, when and where, which matters because each proposed class is limited by state and time.
Photographs of the tube and box can help, including the flavor name, lot code and UPC. Hello's own 2023 recall instructions asked consumers to record the lot code and UPC or photograph the tube and box.
Home testing results are not a substitute for laboratory evidence. An attorney can say whether to keep a product and how any testing should be done.
What Regulatory Actions Have Targeted Hello Toothpaste?
Regulatory actions have targeted Hello toothpaste twice, through a 2023 voluntary recall and a 2025 Texas Attorney General agreement. Neither action concerned lead, and neither is part of the class actions described above.
Colgate-Palmolive announced the recall on August 10, 2023. Some hello Wild Strawberry Fluoride Toothpaste tubes were mislabeled as Fresh Watermelon Fluoride-Free and lacked the Drug Facts box and fluoride warnings. The company reported no adverse events and offered reimbursement to buyers.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton announced the toothpaste agreement on September 15, 2025. Colgate agreed to show pea-sized amounts on packaging for its fluoride toothpastes for children under six, starting November 1, 2025.
| Date | Actor | Action | Product scope |
|---|---|---|---|
| August 10, 2023 | Colgate-Palmolive Company | Voluntary nationwide recall for incorrect labeling | Some hello Wild Strawberry Fluoride Toothpaste, 4.2 oz |
| September 15, 2025 | Texas Attorney General | Agreement on toothpaste imagery in packaging and marketing | Colgate, Tom's of Maine and hello fluoride toothpaste for children under six |
No recall of Hello toothpaste over lead appeared in the sources reviewed. The lead allegations remain unproven claims in pending cases.
How Does the Hello Toothpaste Lawsuit Compare to Related Cases?
The Hello toothpaste lawsuit compares to related Colgate cases mainly by product and by the harm alleged. Each case below has its own court and docket, and none is part of the Hello heavy metals action.
| Case | Court | Product and claim | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Harden v. Colgate-Palmolive Co. | N.D. Ill., No. 1:25-cv-00362 | Colgate and Tom's of Maine kids fluoride mouthrinse | Motion to dismiss denied March 27, 2026 |
| Clayborne v. Colgate-Palmolive Co. | N.D. Ill., No. 1:25-cv-04877 | Kids fluoride toothpaste packaging and dosage depiction | Dismissed without prejudice March 27, 2026 |
| Tom's of Maine heavy metals class action | S.D.N.Y. | Tom's of Maine kids toothpaste with alleged lead and arsenic | Covered on the Colgate lawsuit page |
The March 27, 2026 opinion that decided Harden and Clayborne also decided Cook. It discusses Colgate and Tom's of Maine kids toothpastes in Clayborne and a Hello product only in the rinse cases.
The Colgate lawsuit page tracks the broader set of Colgate and Tom's of Maine matters.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the Hello toothpaste lawsuit about?
The Hello toothpaste lawsuit is about alleged lead and mercury in Hello Kids toothpaste. It also covers related cases over Hello Kids Fluoride Rinse, charcoal whitening claims and sweetener labels, each filed separately against Hello Products LLC or Colgate-Palmolive.
Is the Hello toothpaste lawsuit a class action?
Yes. The Hello toothpaste lawsuit includes proposed class actions, including the consolidated Browne case in New York. No court has certified a class in the pending cases, although the closed charcoal case used a certified settlement class.
Did Hello settle the toothpaste lawsuit?
Hello did settle one toothpaste lawsuit, the charcoal case, for a fund of up to $1.5 million. The lead case in New York has no settlement, and Colgate's motion to dismiss was fully briefed in August 2026.
Can I still join the Hello toothpaste lawsuit?
Generally no, because the Hello toothpaste lawsuit has no open claims process. The charcoal claims deadline passed on October 11, 2022, and the pending class actions have no certified class, so a qualified attorney would need to review your purchase.
How much lead was found in Hello toothpaste?
Plaintiffs allege laboratory testing found 236 to 658 parts per billion of lead in six Hello Kids toothpaste flavors. These are allegations in the Barton complaint, not findings by a court.
Has Hello toothpaste been recalled?
Hello toothpaste has been recalled at least once, in August 2023, for incorrect labeling on some Wild Strawberry tubes. The recall was not about lead, and no recall over lead appeared in the sources reviewed.
Is the Hello toothpaste lawsuit connected to HelloFresh?
No. The Hello toothpaste lawsuit is not connected to HelloFresh in any court record reviewed. It names Hello Products LLC and Colgate-Palmolive, and Fresh Watermelon is simply one Hello toothpaste flavor.