I'll just say this because a lot of the studies and things I've read on the topic are wildly conflicting and/or inconclusive: I will give you every one of your points and finish on one I think is conclusive: lack of informed consent. It is absolutely immoral and unethical to medicate people who have not been informed and consented to being medicated. The levels typically vary, and there are risks to consuming fluoride. There are risks to having it added, even if you think they are outweighed by benefits. That is not for you to decide for anyone else. It's wrong. End of story for me all else aside.  

 And I think the informed consent argument is probably the most honest and compelling of the arguments I've heard against flouridation. So, we at least agree on that! And I think as long as we have a point in common, and are committed to intellectual honesty, we have the basis for a reasoned debate on the topic. I appreciate you bringing up informed consent because it's not a point I regularly see in the context of this issue, and I think it should be brought up more often if for no other reason than to establish a point of commonality, and set the tone for a productive argument.