Brent I suggest you read more of our website or our Facebook page. You are repeating anti-fluoride myths that we have debunked many times over.

“I just want to have the choice for myself and my family”
No one here is stopping anyone to vote it out. But if you don’t want fluoridated water don’t drink it. Use a filter, buy water, use your town’s non-fluoridated tap, collect rain water, etc.

“My reasoning includes applying the precautionary principle”
Actually the precautionary principle is for fluoridation. You’re risking the lives of children.

“risk of brain damage”
No evidence at the recommend levels.

“For a taste of science on the anti-fluoride side, how about the Harvard study, which linked fluoride to lowered IQ in children? ”
Have you actually read these studies? We have and I suggest you read the scientific views on this matter.
http://msof.nz/infomation/myth-busting-fluoridation-and-iq/

“There’s more out there, but it depends if you are already a ‘true believer’ in fluoride benefits, or if your opinion is open to new evidence?”
We are pro-science here, we will change our mind when the scientific consensus change theirs. Cherry picking studies to support your views is anti-science.

A systematic review is a literature review focused on a research question that tries to identify, appraise, select and synthesize all high quality research evidence relevant to that question.

There has been many major systematic reviews, all supporting the safety and effectiveness of fluoridation. Public Health England has just released their water fluoridation review– “Water fluoridation Health monitoring report for England 2014” and it concluded:
“This monitoring report provides evidence of lower dental caries rates in children living in fluoridated compared to non-fluoridated areas. Similarly, infant dental admission rates were substantially lower. There was no evidence of higher rates of the non-dental health indicators studied in fluoridated areas compared to non-fluoridated areas. Although the lower rates of kidney stones and bladder cancer found in fluoridated areas are of interest, the population-based, observational design of this report does not allow conclusions to be drawn regarding any causative or protective role of fluoride; similarly, the absence of any associations does not provide definitive evidence for a lack of a relationship.”
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/300202/Water_fluoridation_health_monitoring_for_england__full_report_1Apr2014.pdf

Similarly, a review – “Health effects of water fluoridation: A review of the scientific evidence” -written on behalf of the Royal Society of New Zealand and the Office of the NZ Prime Minister’s Chief Science Advisor concluded:
“Councils with established CWF schemes in New Zealand can be confident that their continuation does not pose risks to public health, and promotes improved oral health in their communities, reducing health inequalities and saving on lifetime dental care costs for their citizens. Councils where CWF is not currently undertaken can confidently consider this as an appropriate public health measure, particularly those where the prevalence and severity of dental caries is high. A forthcoming study from the Ministry of Health is expected to provide further advice on how large a community needs to be before CWF is cost-effective (current indications point to all communities of 1000+ people).”
http://assets.royalsociety.org.nz/media/2014/08/Health-effects-of-water-fluoridation_Aug_2014.pdf

-Dan

My reasoning includes applying the precautionary principle: risk of brain damage etc vs risk of tooth decay. How can these risks be mitigated? Prevent tooth decay by other well-known measures. Avoid fluoride toxicity by not ingesting it (topical application is a different issue).

For a taste of science on the anti-fluoride side, how about the Harvard study, which linked fluoride to lowered IQ in children? http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/features/fluoride-childrens-health-grandjean-choi/ and the follow-up study http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0892036214001809
and more at http://fluoridealert.org/studies/brain01/
And the impact on thyroid glands: https://scholar.google.co.nz/scholar?hl=en&q=fluoride+thyroid

There’s more out there, but it depends if you are already a ‘true believer’ in fluoride benefits, or if your opinion is open to new evidence?
Weigh up the risks for yourself, but please don’t force it on me.