1.  I didn't miss anything. The quote I provided contradicts your implication that dental fluorosis is some major disorder that has devastating negative effects.  
.

2.  I have no reason to doubt, or trust, the 57% dental fluorosis figure noted in this dissertation.    It's simply another bit of information.  Behbehani doesn't differentiate between levels of dental fluorosis within that 57%, however.  Given that mild to very mild are of no health or esthetic concern, that just leaves moderate and severe, neither of which is associated with optimally fluoridated water.  Additionally, given that there was no reported negative impact on OHRQoL, and no evidence of adverse effect by this increase, his conclusion that benefit of fluoride outweighs any esthetic concerns, seems valid, and in accord with Rozier's findings.
.

3.  What Michael Connett has found in regard to fluoridation is of no more relevance than what Santa Clause has found in that regard.
.

Steven D. Slott, DDS