Just when we thought things were going better for Amanda Bynes, new issues arise to trip her up.
Bynes has been a Millennial darling for decades, after shaping the sense of humor of a generation via her contributions to childhood content. The Amanda Show and All That were just the tip of the iceberg, ultimately launching Bynes into a thriving career that kept her on our screens for more than a decade.
In the early 2010s, however, Bynes fell victim to the persistent struggles many child actors face. She became yet another former child star facing mental health struggles and substance abuse, and for a good decade, she grappled with those issues as far from the spotlight as she could get.
Then, 2023 rolled around. Newly removed from a lengthy conservatorship and sporting a fresh new look, Bynes stepped back into our lives with the launch of her new podcast, Amanda Bynes & Paul Sieminski: The Podcast.
News of the podcast was a balm to Bynes fans, many of whom have been anxiously awaiting her re-emergence for years. We have a renewed opportunity to follow a star we’ve loved for most of our lives, as she engages in an interview-style podcast with scientist Paul Sieminski — or, at least, that’s what we thought.
Soon after the podcast launched, concerning rumors about Sieminski started to spread. Most notably, a supposed former roommate of Bynes’ new partner spoke out on TikTok, alleging that Sieminski is a fraud, fake scientist, and a danger to Bynes. This set off alarm bells across the web, as Bynes’ legion of fans rushed to defend a star that only recently got back on her feet.
The allegations about Paul Sieminski, explained
Amanda Bynes & Paul Sieminski: The Podcast officially launched in December of 2023, and within days the gossip mill was churning. Most of the chatter surrounded Sieminski, Bynes’ new partner, and it was based almost entirely around the claims of a woman who says she is Sieminski’s former roommate.
On TikTok, she goes by @EverybodyHatesXtina, but the videos in question are currently notably absent from her account. That’s the username she posted her story under, however, and it quickly became the biggest conversation on the app. Thankfully, some of her claims have been stitched by other creators, including @barrettpall, a creator known for his skill in debunking rumors, going after online villains, and finding the truth.
In her original claims, @EverybodyHatesXtina blasted Sieminski — a man she claims she used to live with — for incorrectly claiming to be a scientist, lying to Bynes and the world, and even for killing her dog. She dubbed Sieminski a “sociopath,” and labeled him a danger to Bynes, and the 37-year-old Hairspray star’s fans took that claim and ran with it.
The issue arises when those claims are examined. @barrettpall does a great job of debunking them himself, but I went in and researched the man for myself, just to be sure. And, while I can’t prove or disprove some of those claims, I can confirm that one or two of @EverybodyHatesXtina’s statements are definitively false.
Is Paul Sieminski a real scientist?
The biggest of these is her claim that Sieminski is lying about his professional field. Its easy to confirm that Sieminski is, or at least has been, a working scientist. According to the podcaster’s LinkedIn, he’s currently polishing off his studies at UCLA, where he’s pursuing his PhD. His focus zeroes in on “develop[ing] methods for characterization of native membrane protein structure, utilizing cryo-electron microscopy and cryo-electron tomography,” according to the site.
It is vital to note here that Sieminski’s claims about UCLA appear to be false. That’s according to research conducted by @barettpall, who apparently connected with his contacts at the university and confirmed that “there are no articles attached to the doctor that Paul is claiming to be a student of, and its been confirmed that [Paul] left that laboratory during the panorama [pandemic] by just not showing up.”
So we know Sieminski is lying about at least some of his professional exploits, but is everything false? There’s certainly something fishy going on here, but any claims that Sieminski isn’t a scientist are a stretch.
The claims about UCLA may be inaccurate, based on @barettpall’s research, but that doesn’t erase Sieminski’s history in science, which includes several nationally published scientific papers. One of them, published in October of 2019, is titled “Structure of a Mycobacterium tuberculosis Heme-Degrading Protein, MhuD, Variant in Complex with Its Product,” and lists Sieminski among its contributors where its published on ACS Publications, a site that offers up peer-reviewed journals and research articles.
That mouthful of a title is more than enough to prove that Sieminski knows, at the very least, a lot more about science than the layman. His actual pedigree as a scientist is way over my head, but claims that he isn’t a scientist at all are clearly false. He’s studied science at a respected university, he’s got published work under his name, and he’s clearly eyeing a future in a scientific field.
Is Amanda Bynes safe with Paul Sieminski?
Look, Amanda Bynes has had a rough time of it and that makes it our instinct, as her fans, to protect her. That being said — and fully acknowledging the wholesome motivations behind this instinct — Bynes is a grown woman. She’s a few years older than I am, which puts me in a great position to say that I can protect my damn self. No, I haven’t been through what Bynes has — nor do I have a legion of fans lining up to go to war for me — but I still think its a bit insulting to think we know better than she does.
That being said, I understand why people are concerned. Bynes has been taken advantage of, over and over again, and we don’t want to see her burned again. Add what many fans see as a fragile mental state into the mix, and its fair that so many people are flocking to bolster the 37-year-old star.
As far as my research, and that of @barettpall, can discern, Sieminski is far less dangerous than his former roommate would have you believe. Her claims about him supposedly killing her dog appear to be false, according to conversations between @barettpall and someone close to the situation, and he doesn’t seem to be heading into the podcast with any negative intentions.
How things seem and how things are can be starkly opposed, however, and I agree with @barettpall’s assertion that keeping an eye on the situation is paramount. We all want Bynes to thrive in this life, and the situation with Sieminski is already getting messy. That can negatively impact Bynes, and that’s not what anyone wants.
For now, we only know a few things. Yes, Sieminski is a scientist, even if he’s not currently studying where his LinkedIn claims. He doesn’t seem to have any negative intentions, but his reasons for pairing with Bynes on this project are still unknown. He almost certainly did not sacrifice a dog, at any point, nor did he abandon one. Whether or not he’s the best person for Bynes to be around, in her freshly back to fame moment, has yet to be seen, but for now all we can do is keep an eye on the situation, wish Bynes the best, and hope that no one is waiting in the wings to hurt her again.