Interview with Michele Paduano, Former BBC Reporter
by Andrew Sibley JAOC Investigations
Andrew : Michele, you spent three decades reporting for the BBC in the West Midlands. What first drew your attention to the issue of water fluoridation?
Michele Paduano: I became interested after reviewing the landmark 2024 decision by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The court found that the U.S. fluoridation level of 0.7 milligrams per litre posed an “unreasonable risk” to children’s health. In the West Midlands, our water is fluoridated at 1 mg/L — about 30% higher than the U.S. level.
Andrew: Did anyone influence your investigation into the science behind fluoridation?
Paduano: Yes. Professor Vyvyan Howard, a pathologist specializing in toxicology and a long-time collaborator, alerted me to several major cohort studies in top academic journals linking water fluoridation to lower IQ in children.
Andrew: How did you feel about the mainstream media’s handling of these findings?
Paduano: The rebuttals were so strong and absolute that I knew publishing a story would be difficult. I only pursued it after reading the September 2024 court decision, which cited new evidence pointing to potential neurodevelopmental risks at lower fluoride concentrations. At that point, it felt like my public duty to tell people in the West Midlands that there was potentially a problem.
Andrew: What happened when you tried to pitch the story at the BBC?
Paduano: I pitched it through the BBC’s planning process and even arranged an interview with West Midlands anti-fluoridation campaigner Joy Warren. But senior online and television editors abruptly cancelled it. They told me the story was “scaremongering.” Internal BBC scientists and public-health staff insisted there was no credible new evidence. When I challenged them and urged them to read the U.S. court judgment, they accused me of bias.
Andrew: How did you respond to those accusations?
Paduano: As a BBC journalist, impartiality is fundamental. But impartiality also means reporting new evidence when it emerges.
Andrew: Did you consult other experts on the issue?
Paduano: Yes, I spoke with Professor John Fawell, a leading U.K. pro-fluoridation expert and adviser to the World Health Organization. He acknowledged that recent research should prompt the U.K. to consider lowering fluoridation levels to match U.S. and Canadian guidance. If somebody who is a leading pro-fluoride proponent adjusts their position, that is a story. But BBC editors still refused to let me cover it.
Andrew: Did you escalate your concerns within the BBC?
Paduano: I emailed Deborah Turness, CEO of BBC News and Current Affairs, and Tim Davie, the Director-General. The response was radio silence. I then took my concerns to Nicholas Serota, a BBC board member responsible for editorial standards.
Andrew: What happened next?
Paduano: I learned of planned BBC coverage in the North East about proposed fluoridation expansion. I told Serota that failing to mention the U.S. court decision would constitute significant censorship. The article that eventually appeared briefly mentioned the judgment, but I argued that the West Midlands — which has fluoridated its water for decades — should also have reported on the new developments. The editorial board refused, saying the concern was that we would be scaremongering, frightening people, and that the science wasn’t there.
Andrew: Did this influence your decision to leave the BBC?
Paduano: Yes. My frustrations over fluoride reporting, along with broader concerns about the broadcaster’s impartiality and its close relationship with government, ultimately pushed me to leave.
Andrew: How did the BBC cover fluoridation after you left?
Paduano: Soon after, the BBC published an article about Worcestershire public health officials recommending countywide fluoridation. In what I described as “the ultimate bias,” the article didn’t refer to the U.S. judgment or related research.
Andrew: What did you do after leaving the BBC?
Paduano: I contacted The Independent, which published my story on Fawell’s changing position. I again approached the BBC, arguing that national coverage proved the issue’s newsworthiness, but editors held their ground and directed me to the complaints process — which has resulted in little progress.
Andrew: Has the BBC responded publicly to your allegations?
Paduano: No. The BBC has not responded publicly, and it did not respond to JAOC’s request for comment.
Whistleblower Speaks:
Inside the Home Office Asylum System
By Andrew Sibley JAOC Investigations
Introduction
Ian has worked for the Home Office for 18 years. As one of around 6,500 asylum caseworkers spread across 19 centres in the UK, he has processed thousands of applications. Now, he is speaking out — and resigning — over what he describes as a broken system that leaves caseworkers powerless to stop dangerous individuals from being granted asylum.
“You’re going to be very shocked”
“You’re going to be very shocked by what I tell you,” Ian warned at the start of our interview.
His decision to speak publicly was motivated by a personal tragedy: a friend’s daughter was raped by an asylum seeker. “She is terrified,” he said. “And I can’t ignore the possibility that someone I grant asylum to could do the same, or worse.”
Powerless to Stop Known Offenders
Ian described how men with criminal histories — including those on the sex offenders register — are still considered for asylum.
“We’ve had applicants who exposed themselves in children’s play areas, who stalked women, who threatened people. Even those up on rape charges are still eligible.”
The reason, he explained, is legal: unless someone has been sentenced to 12 months or more in prison, they remain eligible for asylum.
“We have to call them customers now”
Caseworkers are instructed to refer to applicants as “customers.” Ian finds this language deeply misleading.
“These are young, undocumented males who’ve destroyed their papers and broken into the country. I run a police check and a terrorist check. The police check might say Mr X exposed himself in a playground. But if he’s from Afghanistan, Eritrea, Sudan, or Kuwait, we’re not allowed to deny asylum.”
These countries are deemed unsafe to return applicants to. “Take Eritrea,” Ian explained. “They have forced military conscription. So anyone claiming to be Eritrean is automatically granted asylum. It’s an open door.”
Grant Rates and Overturned Decisions
Ian highlighted the scale of approvals:
- Between 2021 and 2023, 99% of Syrians were granted asylum.
- In the last eight months alone, he has granted asylum to over 1,000 Eritreans.
- Any rejection he issued was overturned by management.
“Within my section, the grant rate is nearly 100%. My brother works in deportation — he hasn’t processed a single deportation in the past year.”
Whistleblowing and Resignation
Ian has now handed in his notice.
“I’ve encouraged others to do the same and become whistleblowers. Like Nikki, who appeared in the Telegraph recently, many more will come forward. We’re being gaslit and threatened, but the truth has to come out.”
Home Office Response
The Home Office was asked to comment on Ian’s claims. They did not respond.
Conclusion
Ian’s testimony paints a picture of an asylum system under strain, where caseworkers feel powerless, legal thresholds override common sense, and management pressures silence dissent. His resignation — and call for others to follow — suggests that more whistleblowers may soon step forward.
“Taxpayer Bill for Illegal Migration Soars: JAOC’s Explosive Analysis of Government Contracts”
Urgent information for all UK CITIZENS
What are the UK Government and its security services not revealing to the public about illegal migration? This issue goes far beyond questions like how many people are arriving, where they are housed, or what it costs taxpayers. The truth may be far more serious than most realise.
We have gathered intelligence regarding the situation, and once we can fully verify it, the findings will be shared on this website. If the information we've received is confirmed, it’s something everyone needs to know and it is based on an assessment by our security services.
Our intelligence services have completed an assessment of the UK terror threat and submitted it to the government. That report will contain detailed findings and recommended action plans to protect the public.
At the same time, questions remain about why illegal migrants are being moved into military barracks rather than detention centres. A full assessment will already have been provided to the Prime Minister, yet he has not communicated its contents to the public.
This is standard procedure: intelligence services carry out such assessments and deliver them to government leaders. However, it is essential that the public is informed. We will ensure that these findings are not hidden, because transparency is vital to public safety and trust.
Sweden
Gun Crime A weapons cache was discovered last week at an asylum accommodation in Krokom, Jämtland, hidden inside the property’s heating chamber. According to reliable sources, Avpixlat has confirmed contact with both the police and the Security Service. The authorities have since seized the weapons.
Germany
Islamist Suspect Detained in Berlin with a Large Weapons Cache . The German Authorities Arrested a 40-Year-Old Suspected Islamist Militant. The arrest, part of a series of coordinated police raids, led to the discovery of a substantial arsenal, including high-grade military weapons
Ireland
Authorities in Ennis, County Clare, Ireland, have uncovered weapons caches linked to illegal migration. These caches were discovered within an asylum accommodation center, and additional, undisclosed cases are believed to exist.
Operational Notice: Container Identification & Reporting
We are conducting an urgent search for containers that meet the following criteria:
-
Size: 20ft or 40ft
-
Colour: Blue
-
Markings: Distinct container identification codes and company prefixes (to be cross‑checked against the attached guide document)
The attached document should be used as a reference guide to help identify specific containers during inspections.
All information gathered and passed to JAOC will be treated as confidential. Reports and findings must be uploaded directly to the dedicated project server via the secure link provided.
https://drive.proton.me/urls/Y94DC3EX0R#98pokGwJdiY6
Beyond the ordinary
Until they become conscious, they will never rebel, and until after they have rebelled, they cannot become conscious.” George Orwell
“We are not your enemies. We are your conscience. We are not your executioners. We are your wake-up call.” Anonymous
JAOC RANKS IN TOP TIER
ScamAdviser’s trust ratings, earns this website as a top-tier score that reflects unmatched transparency,
credibility, and digital integrity.
-
JAOC (96/100) ranks highest, reflecting strong verification, secure infrastructure, and consistent transparency.
-
Lie Detector Test UK (95/100) and Find UK People (94/100) follow closely, both known for their reliability in personal and legal investigations.
-
Orion Investigations (93/100) and Are They Safe (92/100) maintain solid reputations in UK-based private intelligence and safeguarding.
-
Smith Investigation Agency (90/100) and Diligentia Group (85/100) round out the list, respected but with slightly lower digital trust metrics.
JAOC’s impact extends far beyond our website. Our content is regularly referenced across platforms like Reddit, YouTube, and independent forums, where users engage with our investigations and share our findings. Behind the scenes, our digital footprint is benchmarked by industry-standard analytics tools including Palantir, Gephi, and Meltwater, which track how our content spreads, how audiences interact with it, and how our influence compares to peer platforms. These tools confirm what our readers already know: JAOC is a trusted, high-engagement source for verified information and public accountability.
Thank you for supporting our work.
If you appreciate my efforts, I kindly ask you to consider supporting my website with a small donation, if possible, or by leaving a comment and rating my site. Your support is invaluable as I strive to uncover the truth and share it with the public, often at significant personal risk.
Testimonials
"Amazing investigations detailed and very enlightening. The DOCUMENT section continually being updated is a wonderful idea. Thank you for being a legend."
Tilly family ( Auckland)
Your website provided clear and factual advice on COVID-19, emphasising the importance of informed consent. The resource centre helped our family as we were not getting help or guidance from our local health centre. Highly recommend it for reliable vaccine information.”
Peter & Melissa H ( Cardiff )
"In a world where misinformation is rampant JAOC.ORG.UK stands out as a beacon of truth. It has become my go-to source for reliable news, and I highly recommend it to anyone seeking factual and unbiased information."
Susan P ( Exeter )