Narcissists will make over exaggerated, self flattering statements. Therefore, it comes as no surprise that Bottley regularly declares himself to be an “international expert with an excellent reputation”.
Of course someone who is genuinely held in such high regard, don’t make these statements themselves, others do!
However, other than an odd follower, (who in reality follows Bottley for his bullying & trolling rather than any of his academic credentials), I have not seen anyone make these claims other than Bottley himself.
Whether it be in flow cytometry, sheep farming or even role playing gaming. His superiority complex is exhibited. He is not content with being competent in his pursuits. He has to claim superior knowledge above all others.
Could this be the reason he was unable to continue in academia and achieve his goal of becoming a professor. Believing he knows it all, thus an inability to expand his knowledge.
Even in a moment of clarity when he appears to accept he doesn’t know everything. He continues with a self-flattering statement, “I know more about it than all but a few hundred people in the world”
If there were a modicum of truth in his claim, he would undoubtedly be one of the top immunologist in the world. Yet doesn’t make it into the list of top 2,000 global immunologists.
Given his h-index of 6, this will be no surprise to anyone, except perhaps Bottley himself.
Bottley does indeed have a BSc in Cell Biology, a MSc in Biochemistry and a PhD in immunology which he achieved in 2000. He does have 13 publications listed.
Although his first publication “The relationship between nitric oxide synthesis and MHC class I receptors on human monocytic cells” (published 2000, date unknown) is unavailable. Perhaps this was a first submission of his PhD thesis, which due to it having an almost identical title to a 1998 publication was rejected. Of course I am just speculating. It does however appear to be superseded by his second paper, “Dimerization of major histocompatibility complex class I on the surface of THP‐1 cells stimulates the expression of inducible nitric oxide synthase and subsequent nitric oxide release”, (published 1st Aug 2000) which he has shared authorship with his then Professor. (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10929071/)
His last publication, is not a research paper. It is an autobiographical piece. One in a series of articles by PhD immunology alumni. Aimed to be ‘a platform for career advice and to elevate the voices of diverse immunologists to provide multiple perspectives on a successful career in immunology’. (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/imcb.12588)
It’s a surprisingly short article, especially when compared to the other contributions in the series. It’s amateurish, and lacks any real details. It doesn’t give any of the advice promised in the second paragraph. The last few words ”rule nothing out as a future career”, sounds like careers advice for a high school pupil destined to fail.
Bottley does not mention he is a “viral immunologist working on the SARS-CoV-2 virus and vaccines”. Nor does he mention his expertise in biosafety, & biosecurity. His current gene therapy work. His newly set up ivermectin project. He’s completely silent about his expertise in vaccines, including his work on mRNA vaccines and his work on “an early lipofection paper or two” with none other than Robert Malone.
Instead the article explains to the reader, why he came out of academia, and why his attempts to return to academia were rejected. It goes on to explain why he failed to last in meaningful employment, citing the “pressure to improve did not suit my personality or outlook” and “them and not me”. Thus giving him little choice but to become self employed/sole-trader, demonstrating flow cytometry.
The Elusive Projects
Despite Bottley’s latest publication failing to mention any of his current projects, he has no reservations in tweeting about them. Probably because Bottley can be as diplomatic as he likes with the truth when it comes to twitter. Whereas he would have been required to supply sources for these claims to be included in the article.
At every opportunity, since December 2020, and without a shred of evidence, Bottley claims he is working on 5 or 6, various, several, 8, SARS-CoV-2 projects.
.He can’t talk about them due to his claim he has signed NDAs. But just like his excuses of why he is only named on 17% of publications he’s authored, the NDAs seem very convenient.
The lack of plausibility in his claims intensifies as weeks, and months pass, and still nothing published. It’s been over a year (Dec 2021) since Bottley claimed he had a paper ready to submit.
Last April, he claimed a paper titled "The Use Of Imaging Cytometry For improved Quantification Of Exosomal Markers” had been submitted. He stated this was just the “working title”. But as he also claimed it was submitted, then this would be the final title.
Either way the paper does not exist.
Another one, was to be submitted in May 2022, with several more “being submitted imminently” in early July 2022.
Halloween 2022, he was chasing the co-author. We can only presume he never caught him.
It’s highly unlikely that funding for these projects (if they do exist) would continue for over 2 years with no results. Especially given the evidence the ‘researcher’ is spending all day, every day “debunking” on twitter.
He increasingly reminds me of the character ‘Father McKenzie’ in the Beatles song Eleanor Rigby;
“Writing the words of a sermon that no one will hear”
Only instead writing sermons,, he’s writing research papers (apparently) never submitted, so no one will ever read.
Plagiarism
Making bold claims of being involved in several SARS-CoV-2 research projects for over 2 years, becomes problematic, when you don’t produce anything.
The twitter audience, Bottley is desperate to impress (or hoodwink), may become impatient. The self flattering statements and grossly over exaggerated claims of superiority, won’t alway be enough without evidence to back them up.
With no data of his own, Bottley has got into a habit of sharing images from studies, he had no involvement in. He never cites the source or gives any context. He sometimes goes as far as to claim it is his own data, “explain my previous data”. Other times he claims ownership of the data by implication.
“Evidence of SARS-CoV-2-Specific Memory B Cells Six Months After Vaccination With the BNT162b2 mRNA Vaccine”. In brief, 6 month follow up in June 2021, of 145 participants who were given just 2 shots, 3 weeks apart of the Pfizer vaccine in November & December 2020.
As we now know the immunity waned. The fact people are now receiving 4th and 5th doses, somewhat overshadows what appeared promising results when this study was first published.
Of course without citing the source or giving context, Bottley can claim it to be proof of anything he wants to prove, and he often does.
Bottley appears to have found a new favourite study or a new favourite picture at least. Again he is sharing without citing the source, thus implying it is his data.
“Dynamics of B-Cell Responses after SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination in Spain”. A small study initially of 26 individuals, with the final group reduced to just 19 individuals .
So wouldn’t be considered conclusive or strong evidence. No wonder Bottley only shares the pretty pictures.
Its noticeable that Bottley always asks “explain this”. Without a source or context, even a scientist, with the relevant credentials will struggle explaining what they are looking at. Bottley is well away of this, it’s exactly why he does it.
Sharing ‘pretty pictures’ (scientific images, plots, maps) with a view to hoodwink, is not what anyone would expect from an academic. Sharing anything from a study without citing the source, so to claim ownership, or to be as bold as to directly claim ownership, is plagiarism, and gross academic misconduct. Something a genuine expert with an excellent reputation would never be guilty of…
This is damning. I accepted that he was unable to maintain a professional stance and have a scientific debate on clinical data, because I knew his background was limited to flow cytometry in viral immunology at the time he did his PhD, but just teaching flow cytometry since. I also knew that he was lying about the 70+ papers and about being commissioned by multiple universities, although he could hide behind that as nobody could prove it until they put in FOIs to those universities. What I didn't anticipate was trying to palm off other peoples' work as his own. Plagiarism. The lowest act of a pseudo-scientist.
So he's a failed academic with a loose relationship to the truth, and he's also a Covid/lockdown/vaccine fanatic with religious zeal.
Having left academia isn't an issue - many of the best analyses of Covid-related data come from keen data scientists and statisticians with no previous viral experience.
But being angry and delusional and fanatical about Covid (so much that he has no doubts at all) is a good reason for muting him on Twitter. Unfortunately he seems to be in with a wider Covid-fanatic crowd, including some of the nutters at Imperial.
This is damning. I accepted that he was unable to maintain a professional stance and have a scientific debate on clinical data, because I knew his background was limited to flow cytometry in viral immunology at the time he did his PhD, but just teaching flow cytometry since. I also knew that he was lying about the 70+ papers and about being commissioned by multiple universities, although he could hide behind that as nobody could prove it until they put in FOIs to those universities. What I didn't anticipate was trying to palm off other peoples' work as his own. Plagiarism. The lowest act of a pseudo-scientist.
So he's a failed academic with a loose relationship to the truth, and he's also a Covid/lockdown/vaccine fanatic with religious zeal.
Having left academia isn't an issue - many of the best analyses of Covid-related data come from keen data scientists and statisticians with no previous viral experience.
But being angry and delusional and fanatical about Covid (so much that he has no doubts at all) is a good reason for muting him on Twitter. Unfortunately he seems to be in with a wider Covid-fanatic crowd, including some of the nutters at Imperial.