I love that this is the state of public discourse even on hacker news. Just accuse something of being like anti-vax and the down votes follow. No critical thought required.
Also, very classy of you to paint me as "anti-fluoride" like I would have to have some sort of agenda to question why things are being added to drinking water.
Please abstain, all of you, from acerbic swipes at one another. Both sides are to blame here.
If you must dispute water fluoridation on Hacker News, do so by making careful, factual, respectful comments.
The site guidelines specifically ask you not to call names. That includes both calling each other names as well as calling each others' arguments names (e.g. "woo").
Public water fluoridation has well-understood health benefits (a reduction in cavities that cannot be achieved through brushing alone). It also has well-understood drawbacks (tooth mottling in high concentrations, toxicity in high concentrations).
Someone participating in this discussion would either know this from general knowledge, or could look it up.
It's trivial to find sources for the effectiveness of fluoride in preventing tooth decay (Google -> Wikipedia -> a citation leads you here: http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5014a1.htm). There are also studies on water fluoridation's impacts, though it's harder to test that, by nature.
The peer reviewed studies were not created by that website. That page just lists the links to studies that were published in peer reviewed journals.
I'm not sure how any of this relates to vaccines, since we are talking about fluoride. But anytime you want to know if something is true or not, the only way I know of is to dig deeper for more information.
No, you're going to have to do the legwork of going to one of the many other pro-fluoridation sites to read those studies. Then, depending on how interested you are in the truth, you'll have to weigh all of the findings, and even look into who produced the studies (follow the money). Welcome to the 21st century, where it usually takes some effort to find the truth in controversial issues.
One thing to keep in mind while digging in, we know there is a financial incentive behind pro-fluoridation studies (it is expensive for business to dispose of it). As far as I know, there isn't much financial incentive in being against fluoridation, save for some boutique toothpaste brands that would probably lack the resources to conduct peer reviewed studies.