By default, we should not add anything to the water.
The burden of proof should be on the people who want to add it. Because that is extra cost, extra chemical. If they can't prove it, then we don't do it.
> Is there scope to believe they just think it may be better not to have it in the water?
Are you asking if there's room to believe it's just a sincere "everything you eat or drink should stay untouched, like it's found in nature" belief? OK sure, let's go with that. So why aren't they working to dismantle water treatment plants altogether and e.g. fighting against modern industrial farming practices in that case?
> No, I’m asking if it’s possible they might just rightly or wrongly believe water fluoridation is bad.
I'm happy to believe it if I can understand what is leading them to that belief, which is exactly what I'm asking. Is it a general aversion to unnatural stuff (hence my previous comment) or based on some evidence (hence my initial question) or something else (what?)?
> I believe they think water fluoridation is linked it lower IQs, again, rightly or wrongly. I could be mistaken but that’s always seemed pretty clear.
Again, we go back to my initial question [1]: what is the best evidence in favor of this?
