Maybe a meet in the middle solution (even if it’s a misguided emotionally driven recapturing of control movement) is something like:

« we’ll agree to remove fluoride from the water but in support/exchange we will ban the sale of bottled water in the same areas(or place a prohibitively high tax on their purchase). »

Since the sources of bottled water are often dubious and unregulated, it’s the best way to reduce the chance that fluoridated water finds its way into the community by bottle and reduces waste at the same time 🤷‍♀️

Use potential tax savings to subsidize fluoride treatment to families that are interested?

Ugh, I hate lazy science reporting like this. A title like « Horny fish seem to survive/breed more » is not only catchier but more accurate.