It looks like the boo-birds are at it again, seeking to reopen the debate on fluoride in our water!
They argue that they should not be forced to take a drug without their consent. They should have a choice. Their argument also is that fluoride is a dangerous substance. I'm surprised they didn't include a request to remove chlorine from our water supply, also. After all, it, too, is a dangerous substance, and we have no choice about its inclusion!
Research has shown that chlorine in our drinking and swimming water is a safeguard against harmful bacteria. Research has also shown that fluoride helps prevent tooth decay. In the interests of public health, therefore, we add chlorine and fluoride to our water supply to keep the population healthy. Since many people are not fastidious with their dental hygiene, adding fluoride seems like a "healthy" decision.
As for the "choice" part, we did try offering a fluoride-free supply source in the form of a water tap, but very few people made use of it, so it was discontinued. If the majority of the population is in favour of fluoridated water, what right does a vocal minority have in forcing the rest of us from having it in our water?
I once lived in an area which had a high concentration of iron in the water supply. I bought a distiller to solve the problem. I still use that distiller whenever I want a chemical-free water supply. I have a choice.

Eugene Balay
Lethbridge