¹ Strasser, Susan, Satisfaction Guaranteed: The Making of the American Mass Market (New York, 1989), 6.Google Scholar

² Tedlow, Richard S., New and Improved: The Story of Mass Marketing in America (Oxford, 1990), 20.Google Scholar

³ Pope, Daniel, The Making of Modern Advertising (New York, 1983)Google Scholar; Marchand, Roland, Advertising the American Dream: Making Way for Modernity (Berkeley, 1985Google Scholar); Leiss, William, Kline, Stephen, and Jhally, Sut, Social Communication in Advertising: Persons, Products and Images of Weil-Being (Toronto, 1990Google Scholar); Strasser, Satisfaction Guaranteed; Tedlow, , New and Improved; Vincent Vinikas, Soft Soap, Hard Sell: American Hygiene in an Age of Advertising (Ames, Iowa, 1992Google Scholar).

⁴ Hollander, Stanley C., “The Marketing Concept: A déjà vu,” in Fisk, G., ed., Marketing Management Technology as a Social Process (New York, 1986Google Scholar); Hollander, Stanley C. and Germain, Richard, Was There a Pepsi Generation Before Pepsi Invented It? Youth-Based Segmentation in Marketing (Lincolnwood, Ill., 1992).Google Scholar

⁵ Church, Roy, “New Perspectives on the History of Products, Firms, Marketing, and Consumers in Britain and the United States since the Mid-Nineteenth Century,” Economic History Review 52 (Aug. 1999): 430CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Nancy Koehn's work on brands shows how illuminating such case studies can be. See Koehn, Nancy F., Brand New: How Entrepreneurs Earned Consumers' Trust from Wedgwood to Dell (Boston, 2001Google Scholar); Koehn, Nancy F., “Henry Heinz and Brand Creation in the Late Nineteenth Century: Making Markets for Processed Food,” Business History Review 73 (Autumn 1999): 349–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁶ Colgate was careful not to make overly ambitious claims about the chemical properties of the paste itself. The act of brushing with Colgate was promoted, not just the product itself. The endorsement of the professor of dentistry was merely that the product offered “a pleasant and agreeable stimulation” and imparted “an agreeable fragrance to the breath.” See “Colgate Dental Cream,” Modern Packaging (May 1949): 102; Simley, John, “Colgate,” in Jorgensen, Janice, ed., Encyclopedia of Consumer Brands, vol. 2: Personal Products (Detroit, 1994), 140–3.Google Scholar

⁷ “Colgate Dental Cream,” Modern Packaging (May, 1949): 101, 103.

⁸ Peiss, Kathy, Hope in a Jar: The Making of America's Beauty Culture (New York, 1998), 97–133Google Scholar; Scranton, Philip, ed., Beauty and Business: Commerce, Culture and Gender in Modern America (New York, 2001).Google Scholar

⁹ Gerard B. Lambert, “How I Sold Listerine,” Fortune (Sept. 1956), 111, 168–72; Marchand, Advertising the American Dream, 18–20; Vinikas, Soft Soap, Hard Sell, 95–117.

¹⁰ Teeth are among the best preserved parts of the body after death, enabling scientists to accurately measure the distribution of dental caries in different historical periods. See, for example, Moore, W. J., “Dental Caries in Britain from Roman Times to the Nineteenth Century,” in Geissler, Catherine and Oddy, Derek J., eds., Food, Diet and Economic Change Past and Present (Leicester, 1993), 50–61Google Scholar. Evidence that nineteenth-century dentists and physicians regarded tooth decay as a growing problem is found in Drummond, J. C. and Wilbraham, Anne, The Englishman's Food: A History of Five Centuries of English Diet (London, 1957 edition), 385–7.Google Scholar

¹¹ Jones, Geoffrey, “The Chocolate Multinationals: Cadbury, Fry and Rowntree 1918–1939,” in British Multinationals: Origins, Management and Performance (Aldershot, 1986), 96–118Google Scholar; Chandler, Alfred D., Scale and Scope: The Dynamics of Industrial Capitalism (Cambridge, Mass. 1990), 242–7, 262–8.Google Scholar

¹² Burnett, John, Plenty and Want: A Social History of Diet in England from 1815 to the Present Day (London, 1979 edition), 24, 132, 318.Google Scholar

¹³ Orwell, George, “The Lion and the Unicorn: Socialism and the English Genius—Part I: England Your England,” in Orwell, Sonia and Angus, Ian, eds., The Collected Essays, Journalism and Letters of George Orwell, Vol. 2: My Country Right or Left (London, 1968), 57.Google Scholar

¹⁴ Levenstein, Harvey A., Revolution at the Table: The Transformation of the American Diet (New York, 1988Google Scholar). American eating patterns in the twentieth century are explored in Levenstein, Harvey A., Paradox of Plenty: A Social History of Eating in Modern America (New York, 1993).Google Scholar

¹⁵ Mintz, Sidney W., Sweetness and Power: The Place of Sugar in Modern History (New York, 1985), 188.Google Scholar

¹⁶ Root, Waverley and Rochemont, Richard de, Eating in America: A History (New York, 1976), 418.Google Scholar

¹⁷ Burnett, Plenty and Want, 139–40.

¹⁸ Moore, “Dental Caries,” 50, 56.

¹⁹ Dental caries has, in fact, been classified as one of a number of medical conditions characteristic of modern civilization. See, Cleave, T. L., The Saccharine Disease: Conditions caused by the Taking of Refined Carbohydrates, such as Sugar and White Flour (Bristol, 1974), 66–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

²⁰ Miller's The Microorganisms of the Mouth was published in 1890. See Loe, H. A., “Scientific Revolutions in Dentistry,” Journal of Dental Research 58 (Special Issue D, 1979), 2164–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

²¹ See Lufkin, A. W., A History of Dentistry (London, 1948), 226–9.Google Scholar

²² Loe, “Scientific Revolutions,” 2165; Lufkin, A History of Dentistry, 229–33.

²³ King, Roger, The History of Dentistry: Technique and Demand (Cambridge, 1997), 27.Google Scholar

²⁴ Harris, Robert S., “Dietary Chemicals in Relation to Dental Caries,” in Dietary Chemicals vs. Dental Caries, ed. Harris, Robert S. (Washington, D.C., 1970), 2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

²⁵ Chandler, Scale and Scope, 147–9.

²⁶ “Colgate Dental Cream,” 101–2.

²⁷ Chandler, Scale and Scope, 148.

²⁸ Advertising costs accounted for approximately 28 percent of toothpaste sales in both the United States and the United Kingdom in the mid-1930s. Only proprietary medicines were more heavily advertised. Kaldor, Nicholas and Silverman, Rodney, A Statistical Analysis of Advertising Expenditure and of the Revenue of the Press (Cambridge, 1948), 31, 146–7.Google Scholar

²⁹ “Colgate Dental Cream,” 100–3; Simley, “Colgate,” 140–3.

³⁰ Lazell, H. G., From Pills to Penicillin: The Beecham Story (London, 1975), 7–11.Google Scholar

³¹ Vinikas, Soft Soap, Hard Sell, 93.

³² Wilson makes little mention of toothpaste in his authoritative three-volume history of the company. Wilson, Charles, A History of Unilever, 3 vols. (London, 1954, 1968).Google Scholar

³³ Unilever's operations in the U.S. toothpaste market after 1945 are described in Jones, Geoffrey, “Control, Performance, and Knowledge Transfers in Large Multinationals: Unilever in the United States, 1945–1980,” Business History Review 76 (Autumn 2002): 435–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³⁴ A Unilever committee, appointed to explore the possibilities offered by the “toilet preparations” market, reported in 1960 that, in the toothpaste sector, its product quality and distribution had for many years been inferior to Colgate's, and “it is only in the last year or two that we have been matching them in a number of markets.” Unilever set itself the ambitious target of increasing its global market share in toothpaste by 50 percent by 1965. “World Toilet Preparations Survey 1959–1960,” report no. 3110, 23–9; D. B. Hurst and J. Pierre, “Personal Products Sales Analysis, 1977–1982,” report no. ES 82303. Both in UAR.

³⁵ Editors of Advertising Age, The House that Ivory Built (Lincolnwood, Ill., 1988), 24–5Google Scholar; Schisgall, Oscar, Eyes on Tomorrow: The Evolution of Procter and Gamble (Chicago, 1981), 204–9.Google Scholar

³⁶ Lazell, From Pills to Penicillin, 75.

³⁷ “World Toilet Preparations Survey, 1959–60,” report no. 3110, 24, UAR.

³⁸ Toothpaste consumption in Canada was much closer to the levels seen in the United States than to those in most European countries. See Table 2.

³⁹ Unilever Economics Department, “Toothpaste Strategy: An Economics Contribution,” May 1987, paper 1, UAR.

⁴⁰ European Cosmetics Markets (Nov. /Dec. 1991), 317–20.

⁴¹ “Transnational Strategies—Some Multinational Competitors of Unilever” (1983), 6, ES 83135, UAR.

⁴² L. Sutton and F. van den Berg, “Blendax: A Profile of What P&G Have Bought” (Nov. 1987), ES 87042, UAR.

⁴³ “Toothpaste Strategy: An Economics Contribution,” paper 7.

⁴⁴ “World Toilet Preparations Survey, 1959–1960,” 28.

⁴⁵ “Toothpaste Tempest,” Chemical Week (22 Aug. 1964): 53–4.

⁴⁶ Schisgall, Eyes on Tomorrow, 205.

⁴⁷ Schumpeter, J. A., The Theory of Economic Development: An Enquiry into Profits, Capital, Credit, Interest and the Business Cycle (trans, by Opie, Redvers, Cambridge, Mass., 1934). 88Google Scholar; also Casson, Mark, ed., Entrepreneurship (Aldershot, 1990), 128.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ “Adult Approach,” Chemical Week (2 Apr. 1955): 80–3.

⁴⁹ “Competition in the US Toothpaste Market,” Table 3; Schisgall, Eyes on Tomorrow.

⁵⁰ “Toothpaste Tempest”; Schisgall, Eyes on Tomorrow.

⁵¹ “Competition in the US Toothpaste Market,” Table 3.

⁵² “Toothpaste Tempest,” 53.

⁵³ “Dentists Endorse Colgate Formula,” Business Week (11 Oct. 1969), 46–7; “Competition in the US Toothpaste Market,” Table 3.

⁵⁴ Schumpeter, J. A., Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy (London, 1976 edition), 81–6.Google Scholar

⁵⁵ “Competition in the US Toothpaste Market,” 7–8.

⁵⁶ In many European countries, such as France, Belgium, Sweden, and the Netherlands, any products making medical claims, could only be distributed through pharmacies. Unilever Marketing Division, “Gum Health Toothpaste Review,” June 1974, Reports Box 8, SC 5216, Appendix 2. Unilever Archives, London [UAL hereafter].

⁵⁷ “Toothpaste Strategy,” paper 3.

⁵⁸ See “Toothpaste Strategy: An Economics Contribution,” paper 6, 2; “Gum Health Toothpaste Review,” 12; L. Sutton and F. van den Berg, “Blendax: A Profile of What P&G Have Bought” (Nov. 1987), ES 87042, UAR.

⁵⁹ “Toothpaste Strategy,” paper 4, 2.

⁶⁰ The House that Ivory Built, 25.

⁶¹ Schisgall, Eyes on Tomorrow, 201.

⁶² “P&G's Crest Gets Modernity, Dimension in Magazines,” Advertising Age (20 Oct. 1969), 156.

⁶³ Opie, Colgate-Palmolive, 27.

⁶⁴ “Gum Health Toothpaste Review,” 11, 15.

⁶⁵ Ibid.

⁶⁶ “Brand Policy Document: Close Up,” 4.

⁶⁷ Ibid., 5–6, Appendix 3.

⁶⁸ Opie, Colgate-Palmolive, 25.

⁶⁹ “World Toilet Preparations Survey 1959–1960,” report no. 3110; D. B. Hurst and J. Pierre, “Personal Products Sales Analysis, 1977–1982,” report no. ES 82303, 26.

⁷⁰ See appendix.

⁷¹ A similar picture can be detected in Europe. A survey of the gum health sector found that “the tendency is for on-going brands to sustain themselves by advertising below their market share.” In Germany in 1973, for example, Blend-a-Med held a market share of 25 percent, yet it accounted for less than 18 percent of advertising. “Gum Health Toothpaste Review,” 11 and Appendix 6.

⁷² Eyes on Tomorrow, 207.

⁷³ “Gum Health Toothpaste Review,” 16.

⁷⁴ Williamson, Judith, Decoding Advertising: Ideology and Meaning in Advertising (London, 1982 edition), 12.Google Scholar

⁷⁵ Tedlow, New and Improved, 4–8.

⁷⁶ “Gum Health Toothpaste Review,” 15.

⁷⁷ “Brand Policy Document: Close Up,” 3.

⁷⁸ Ibid., 5.

⁷⁹ “P&G's Crest Gets Modernity.”

⁸⁰ “Gum Health Toothpaste Review,” 9.