Sorry, but without documentary evidence from Proctor & Gamble's site OR from the Mr. Clean package, that clearly indicates that the sponge is ONLY melamine foam, I don't think it's reasonable or prudent to assume that.

Large companies are constantly looking for ways to cut costs or improve consumer acceptance of products, and if nothing forces them to keep to a particular formula (such as a public statement to the effect that they WILL stick to that formula), if if Clean Sponge *were* only melamine foam TODAY, there's no guarantee it will be still only that, tomorrow.

Proctor & Gamble has been one of the worst about issuing "New & Improved" products that are 'improved' by reduced active ingredient, or by repackaging in a container with updated graphics and reduced contents, as in, "improved, easier to handle container' . . . that is easier to handle because it contains 62 fl. oz. instead of 64!

As I understand it, the various laws establishing and extending the responsibilities large publicly traded companies have to their shareholders have been revised over the last 10 - 15 years in such a way that they have created an OBLIGATION on the part of those companies to rip off consumers every way they can legally do so, if by ripping them off, they can improve returns to shareholders. It may not have been the intention of those writing the laws, to create that effect, but as I understand it, that effect WAS created, intended or not.

The short version of all that is that big US companies are now legally obligated to rip off consumers in every way they can, and thus -- by law -- cannot be trusted.

So, barring some sort of written evidence that P&G not only HAS made the clean sponge from melamine foam, but has obligated itself to CONTINUE to do so, there's no way to be sure.