A client of IHRB was alarmed about Mr Cohen’s dangerous advice. So he sent a report to the Commissioner of the Health Care Complaints Commission. Here is a copy of the main letter which details obvious disregard for the client’s health, giving the client false information while refusing to refund the money under the terms of the contract.
Re: Reporting alleged violations of the Permanent Prohibition Order under section 41A(2)(a)(ii) on Mr Samuel Cohen of the Institute of Hair Regrowth & Beauty Pty Ltd (IHRB).
I believe that Mr Cohen of IHRB has violated Conditions 2 & 3 of the Prohibition Order which the Commission issued 22 February 2011. As you know, the Order placed the following conditions:
1) Mr Cohen must not be in possession of any client prescriptions.
2) Mr Cohen must not obtain, supply or sell any medications requiring a prescription by a medical practitioner or required to be sold only by a pharmacist.
3) Mr Cohen must inform his clients that loniten is not approved in Australia by the Therapeutic Goods Administration when advising clients about hair regrowth prescription medication.
I visited Mr Samuel Cohen for my final examination on Thursday 28 April 2011 at 15 pm. It was during this 30-minute meeting that Mr Cohen made a range of statements that I believe constitute approximately thirty violations of the Order as noted in this letter.
I hope that HCCC or the Director of Public Prosecutions or the relevant Authority would put a stop to Mr Cohen’s medical malpractice by pressing charges.
For your consideration, here are my complaints of alleged violations during my meeting with Mr Cohen 28 April 2011.
ALLEGED VIOLATIONS DURING MEETING 28 APRIL 2011
1) Mr Cohen asked me to obtain prescription for non-approved medications
Mr Cohen wanted me to go to a GP to pick up a prescription for two non-approved S4 medications. I believe that Mr Cohen has no right to sell a treatment that relies upon mediations. Mr Cohen’s entire business relies 100% on medications. He might refute this, but he is misleading authorities and I can help you to spot the deception if you wish to delve deeper into this. Much later in our conversation, Mr Cohen did tell me that the medications are not approved by the TGA, but he played it down by saying that they are approved all over the world. This is not true. The medications (Loniten and Proscar) are dangerous and specifically not approved for hair and not approved around the world. As you know, Loniten can cause heart failure. Proscar can cause persistent erectile dysfunction even after patients stop using it. It can also cause male breasts and male breast cancer. Mr Cohen should not operate a business and tell clients to go to their GP for medications. The moment a client goes to a GP, that relationship ought to end there, and the GP should take over as the one treating the patient. What right does Mr Cohen have to run a business that needs medications, even if he says that they are not approved. Then why still ask for them?
2) Said all warnings about Finasteride were ‘bullshit’
Mr Sam Cohen said that I should not believe anyone who tells me that Finasteride can cause erectile dysfunction. He said that I should take Loniten and Finasteride and that I need not pay attention to anyone who says that Finasteride can cause erectile dysfunction. I had told him that I am to be married soon, and that I wanted to start a family. Mr Cohen said that the warnings about Finasteride are all ‘Bullshit’ claiming that all his footballers are using it. It is bad enough that Mr Cohen wanted me to use non-approved products, but he refutes the warnings. Finasteride can cause persistent erectile dysfunction, but Mr Cohen insisted that that Finasteride is harmless, and that I have nothing to worry about.
Mr Cohen says that doctors only know how to consult the MIMS and that if we were to ask doctors about the side-effects of Proscar, that doctors would say that I might lose my sexual appetite for a short time. This is not correct information. Mr Cohen is misleading me by this inaccurate advice. Merck Sharp & Dohme provides very serious, wide-ranging warnings about Proscar and Propecia. Speaking disparagingly about doctors, Mr Cohen adds that doctors do not inform patients that such side-effects only happen for prostate patients who take 5 or 10 mg per day. Despite telling Mr Cohen that I wanted to start a family, he said that Proscar is harmless and that I would have nothing to worry about. Then speaking as if he were the man in charge of the entire medical treatment, he said that later in the treatment, he will reduce how much I am to take, suggesting that he is the one who will tell me what to take and when to take it. This should not have anything to do with Mr Cohen, so he is still interfering with patients and their medications.
3) Telling me to take two-and-a-half times the recommended dose of Finasteride
Mr Sam Cohen was acting like a doctor by telling me what dosages to take. He said he wanted me to take 2.5 mg of Proscar being half a 5 mg tablet. Proscar is not approved because it is a small tablet that would need to be split. Warnings say that the powder from the split tablet, if touched by a pregnant woman, could cause the male foetus to have deformed genitals. But Mr Cohen ignored all this and instructed me to take 2.5 mg. The Finasteride that is approved is called Propecia, and the approved dosage for that is only 1 mg.
4) Claimed to be the innovator behind the discovery of Finasteride for hair
Mr Cohen boasts about being the innovator in the hair industry by saying that he started the use of Proscar for hair, long before Merck Sharp & Dohme had invented Propecia. Mr Cohen was trying to mislead me into thinking that he was the innovator and that he had discovered that 1.25 mg was his recommended minimum dose to use, even though he wanted me to take 2.5 mg which is half a 5 mg tablet which he confirmed again later in the conversation. This kind of misinformation is harmful and against the dosages approved by the TGA at only 1 mg. A similar claim was made to Mr Nxxx who was another of Mr Cohen’s victims. Mr Nxxx has more to add to this if you wish to contact him.
5) Mocked HCCC’s Prohibition Order and protested his innocence
Mr Cohen mocks HCCC restrictions and denies any wrong-doing, insisting that he had never given any medications to anyone who did not have a prescription. This is false because he had sold to me an S2 products at our first meeting. I had no prescription then. Also, after I did obtain a prescription (to include Retin-A), it was only for three bottles @ 60 ml, but Mr Cohen sold me over 12 bottles @ 100 ml (Appendix 7), which means that he had sold me S4 without a prescription. The bottles had labels to say that they were from Hxxx Pharmacy. Mr Fxxx sent me an email (Appendix 4) to state that my prescription was never presented to him, which means that I was sold bottles that were never dispensed for me. I wonder now where my prescription really is, and if it was tampered with, such as Mr Cohen maybe placing a ‘1’ in front of the ‘3’ that my doctor had requested as the repeats to forge it as a repeat of ‘13’. I now believe that my prescription was hoarded to be used for someone else.
6) Asked me to get Loniten, saying it was approved all around the world except Australia
The HCCC Prohibition Order made it clear that Loniten is not approved for hair and that Mr Cohen must inform clients about this. Mr Cohen said that he wanted me to take Loniten. Although Mr Cohen eventually admitted that Loniten is not approved, he played it down and said that it, too, was approved around the world. This is outrageously risky and false information. Loniten can cause serious heart failure. Anyone taking Loniten must take beta-blockers and diuretics, but Mr Cohen never mentioned any of this. Also, he never told me that when I stop using Loniten, any grown hair would fall out again. He never mentioned that I would need to be on a low-sodium diet. He wanted me to take Loniten and Proscar, combined with what I was already taking, which was Minoxidil that contained Retin-A. These four medications combined would have placed me in great danger. Medical advice is that anyone on Loniten must first start under strict medical supervision, and preferably in a hospital. Mr Cohen was directing me to take half a tablet of the Loniten.
7) Instructed me to increase my dose of the topical solution against my GP’s instructions
The HCCC report made it clear that Retin-A is not approved. Yet Mr Cohen told me to increase the dosage of that topical solution from 3 ml per day to 5 ml per day. He never told me that Retin-A was not approved. As you know, 5% Minoxidil mixed with 0.025% Retin-A as per my prescription is an S4 product. Yet Mr Cohen did not tell me to see my doctor. He acted as my doctor and directed me to take 5 ml and he never outlined the risks. He also said that I could use 5 ml in one go, saying it did not matter how I used it.
8) Suggested I increase to 10% Minoxidil if I could afford it
Mr Cohen wanted me to use 10% Minoxidil with Retin-A but I told him that I could not afford it. Mr Cohen was taking control of my entire treatment, which was 100% a medical treatment, which he should not be involved in.
9) Said that even doctors are his clients, by way of disputing HCCC’s knowledge
To discredit HCCC’s restrictions, Mr Sam Cohen said that he had been directing clients with these S4 medications for 30 years and that doctors are his clients who give him prescriptions in their name for their own use, and he showed me a prescription made out to Dr Ronald Peach (of Willoughby), made out to himself as the patient, for Proscar and Loniten. Mr Cohen called HCCC bastards for restricting his business. Not only was Mr Cohen breaking client-confidentiality by showing me Dr Peach’s file and prescription, he was trying to mislead me to think that Mr Cohen’s practice was safe and normal and that the restrictions are unfair and unwarranted. He said if Dr Peach prescribes it to himself, it would stand to reason that such Loniten and Proscar must be safe. This is misleading and using evidence to tell me that HCCC and TGA do not know what they are doing, trying to convince me to ignore TGA’s rules.
10) Mr Cohen directs the medical treatment but pushes the legal liability onto doctors
When defending himself to the authorities, Mr Cohen insists that he has nothing to do with the medical side of the treatment, and he says that he leaves that to each client’s doctor. He said on Channel 7’s Today Tonight that he sends people to their doctor and asks the doctor to examine the patient, and if the doctor finds them fit, to please issue a prescription. However, Mr Cohen only does this in order to hoard prescriptions and to push the legal liability onto the doctors. In practice, Mr Cohen does not tell clients to heed the GP’s advice. He calls GPs bad names, and he told me that I’ve got to go in search of doctors who will prescribe non-approved medications. (Appendix 5 features a story of how the AMA had admonished Mr Cohen’s method of sending clients to doctors.)
11) Encouraged me to shop-around for doctors who would give me what he wanted
When I first became his client, and Mr Cohen sold me S2 medications without a prescription. He then asked me to go and obtain a prescription for the non-approved Retin-A. I had informed Mr Cohen that my regular GP would not agree to this non-approved product, and Mr Cohen said that I should shop-around. I reminded him of this. But Mr Cohen said that the reason my GP would not give me a prescription had nothing to do with good medical advice, but it was due to greed on the part of the doctor who just wanted to make more money out of me. That is Mr Cohen’s line when anyone tells him that doctors would not comply with his requests. I know that Mr Nxxx can add to this story, saying that Mr Cohen had told him that all doctors and dermatologists are ‘donkeys’ who ‘know nothing about hair’. Mr Nxxx has proof that Mr Cohen said that some doctors will give Mr Cohen prescriptions ‘willy nilly’ because they supposedly trust Mr Cohen.
Telling me to leave my regular GP is basically interfering with the patient/GP relationship and encouraging clients to ignore their own GP’s advice.
12) He gave me a list of doctors to contact, in order to bypass my own GP
When I reminded Mr Cohen that I had to try three different doctors before one of them would agree to give me a prescription, Mr Cohen said that thousands of doctors are giving these prescriptions. This is misleading and irresponsible for Mr Cohen to be encouraging a client to shop-around and ignore the advice of their regular GP. Mr Cohen balances out his admission that Loniten and Proscar are not approved by saying that many doctors do, nonetheless, prescribe it. Mr Cohen said that I had to go in search of doctors who would prescribe it. This kind of advice negates the Prohibition Order and tells the client to work around the problem to suit his intentions. During the early stages of my contact with Mr Cohen, he gave me a list of doctors whom he said had previously prescribed Loniten and Proscar by way of encouraging me to go against the decision of my GP who refused to issue the prescription. Mr Cohen had told me that he knows more than anyone about hair, and that doctors do not know anything. This time, during my last meeting with him on 28 April 2011, I told Mr Cohen that I do not think that my GP would give me a prescription for Loniten and Proscar , he handed to me another list of doctors whom he said would prescribe non-approved products.
13) Told me to ignore any doctor who doesn’t prescribe, and to keep trying others
Not content with any doctor who would not issue a prescription, Mr Cohen wanted me to never take no for an answer. He said that I should not pay attention to any doctor who goes against Mr Cohen’s advice. Mr Cohen was saying that any doctor who advised against his dangerous treatment should not be listened to. He said that if I encounter any opposition from doctors, that I should go to another doctor and keep trying other doctors until I find one who will prescribe these non-approved products.
14) Wanting me to mislead doctors that Loniten is nothing more than approved Minoxidil
Mr Cohen’s form that he hands out to clients tries to mislead doctors (I can provide more on this point if you wish). This time around, he was being more clever about how he tried to mislead me and my doctor, by getting me to write everything down so that nothing is in his own handwriting. While dictating what I should ask for from a doctor, and specifying the non-approved Loniten, he said that I should write down that Loniten is really Minoxidil. This is sneaky and designed to play-down Loniten as nothing more than Minoxidil. I believe that this endangers the lives of clients, and was misleading me into thinking that it is ok to use Loniten. Why must he say that Loniten is Minoxidil? He is softening the misinformation. Worst of all is that Minoxidil on the scalp (topical) is a totally different ballgame from Minoxidil into the system (tablet). It would be like agreeing that acetone might work well to remove nail-polish from a fingernail, but no-one in their right mind would suggest that drinking acetone would be equally safe.
15) Directed me to take half a tablet of Loniten
Not content to leave the direction to a GP, Mr Cohen was directing me to take half a tablet of Loniten at night. He then urges me to write down and note that he is only making a suggestion because he said that he should not really be telling me all this, because he is not allowed to say all this to me. If he is not supposed to tell me, then why was he telling me? These are loophole that Mr Cohen was trying to abuse, at my risk.
16) Misrepresenting the HCCC restrictions and saying it’s business as usual
Mr Cohen was misrepresenting HCCC restrictions. He said that HCCC had said to him customers are supposed to send the prescription to Mr Cohen’s chemists, and that the Chemists are to supply it. Did HCCC say this? Mr Cohen’s use of the term ‘my chemist’ as part of the scam that he operates. He says that his treatment is the only of its kind in the world. He says that no-one else can make his topical solution. He strengthens this idea that he has special ingredients and that his treatment is somehow his intellectual property by saying that no other hair clinic can achieve his results. Ironically, he achieved nothing for me, because I did not grow a single strand of hair during the twelve-month treatment. I think that I have lost more hair, and have been denied an opportunity to get real sound medical help, while being misled by him, and losing $3900 which he has refused to refund, saying that I had agreed that I never expected any hair to grow because I had signed my photos. At no time was I agreeing to his absurd idea that signing the photos meant forfeiting the guarantee. He places stamps on his photos to say that I did not expect any hair to grow. That is not true. I borrowed the money at credit-card interest to pay him in full, and I certainly expected great results or a refund. I received neither.
The topical solution that he says is his own invention, is supposed to contain his Indian Curries or grape-seed extract. To charge thousands of dollars for a non-existent treatment that relies on non-approved medications, Mr Sam Cohen lies about his phantom Indian Curries. The first pharmacist who worked with Mr Cohen for nine years to supply the topical solutions, had said in a letter to Mr Nxxx via Holding Redlich Lawyers, that the Indian Curries do not exist (proof is available upon request). Later, the second pharmacist wrote to Mr Nxxx to explain that the Indian Curries do not exist, and that the recent experiment with the grape-seed extract was short-lived and never had any active ingredients and had no therapeutic benefit and were not in my bottles according to my Batch numbers. The email from the second pharmacist to me also points this out (Appendix 4). An email to another victim (Mr Lxxx who wrote to HCCC to lodge a complaint), from another pharmacist Mr Elias Juanas of Fairfield, also makes it clear that the ingredients do not include any such phantom Curries or herbal extracts.
This means that Mr Cohen is now claiming that HCCC said that clients can send their prescriptions to his chemist. Mr Cohen is misleading me by saying that nothing has changed and that his business is back normal. Mr Cohen wanted me to believe that the only difference is that the paper-trail moves differently. He said that I am still his client. This cannot be correct because once I have a prescription, I am the client of the GP and my relationship with the GP must not be interfered with by Mr Cohen. And when I submit a prescription, it should go to my pharmacist and not his chemist because the relationship would be between me and my pharmacist. So why is Mr Cohen saying that I must use his chemist for his special topical solution that no-one else can compound? That’s because he claims that no other chemist can make his topical solution. What solution? If he has any solution, then he is breaking TGA rules again because he has no right to instruct the pharmacist about any solution and he has no right to interfere with a prescription and add his Indian Curries to it, and although those Curries do not exist, he says they do, and that is how and why his price-list includes $900 bottles that can be purchased at $70 anywhere else. The inflated price of 840% mark-up is justified on the basis that he has special herbs and Curries, so he is perpetuating his original lie and conning me. He admits that he is not to handle the prescription, but he says that he is lodging protests against his Prohibition Orders, and that HCCC does allow him to operate so long as the paperwork goes to his chemist.
17) Still trying to seek the services of a new compounding pharmacist
I believe that Mr Cohen is still trying to find a new compounding pharmacist to assist him with his scam after being abandoned by his first two pharmacists. Incidentally, Mr Cohen refused to pay the bills he owned to his second pharmacist, amounting to $14,800, until that matter was taken to court.
Mr Cohen asked me if I know of any compounding pharmacist with whom I am friendly. This is a leading question which I believe provides a clue that Mr Cohen is still trying to find ways to violate the Prohibition Order. I wonder if the HCCC can conduct a sweep of all Health Department records of all pharmacists who might have recently transacted with IHRB, or if HCCC can send a bulletin to all regular pharmacist and compounding pharmacists to warn them about transacting with IHRB, or maybe issue a special media release and send it specifically to pharmacy journals and magazines to help spread the news that Mr Cohen is not to have any relationship with any pharmacist.
18) Directing how many repeats I should obtain from my GP
Mr Cohen was encouraging me to seek repeats for Loniten and Proscar. Such dangerous medications should not be offered with such extensive repeats without regular medical check-ups. Besides, these medications are dangerous and not approved for hair, and Mr Cohen knows this. Mr Cohen will blame doctors for this, but nonetheless, he is the one placing those requests upon the client, and he should not be mentioning any of this at all.
19) Falsely stating that I had signed an agreement to appoint him as my Agent
Mr Cohen has invented a lie in his head that for thirty years, client have gone to him and signed an agreement that they had appointed him as their agent for the purposes of handling prescriptions. This was not true in my case. I never signed such a thing, yet he took my prescription for 3 bottles and sold me over 12 bottles of S4 medications. I never really understood the medical industry. I had no idea that all this was illegal. Mr Cohen led me to believe that he was the expert and that his treatment was all his own invention. Other victims would also concur (and are willing to testify to HCCC) that they had never signed any agreement to appoint Mr Cohen as their Agent. Then Mr Cohen admits that the restrictions now mean that he is not supposed to handle prescriptions but he tried to mislead me into thinking that this was just a question of how paperwork is handled, and he insisted that nothing had changed in how he treats people.
20) Wanted me to increase dosage despite telling him that my scalp was burning
Mr Cohen’s malpractice in treating three former HCCC Complainants who each developed serious and painful side-effects (Messrs Nxxx, Kxxx, and Sxxx) ought to have made Mr Cohen more aware of his responsibilities when directing people to use medications. In the case of these victims, Messrs Nxxx and Sxxx had no prescription, yet Mr Cohen continued to tell all three clients to keep using Minoxidil after they had reported to him that they had suffered side-effects. During my meeting with Mr Cohen, and even in previous conversations with him earlier on, I had told Mr Cohen that I was suffering burns to my scalp. And I mentioned that the burning happens every couple of days. And I had told him that my head had formed a scab but Mr Cohen ignored what I was telling him, and he wanted me to take 5 ml of Minoxidil with Retin-A in one hit, which is not what my GP had prescribed. Mr Cohen said that the burning was fine and normal. I asked him if his recommended increased dosage was safe and he replied that it was. I even showed Mr Cohen a scab on my head and he saw that my scalp was flaking and I told him that I had never had dandruff until I started using his topical solution but he dismissed it as dead tissues.
21) Directed me to use a non-approved shampoo containing harmful ingredients
I had informed Mr Cohen that I was using his IHRB-Branded shampoo and is said that was ok. However, his shampoo contains Sodium Lauryl Sulphate which his first compounding pharmacist said should not be used. The pharmacist was an innovator. He had worked with Mr Cohen for nine years. He had said in all his Patient Information Sheets that shampoos with this offending ingredient must not be used by clients who use the Minoxidil/Retin-A combination (by the way I was never given any information sheets or warnings). On 28 April 2011 Mr Cohen still said that it was ok for me to use his shampoo, knowing that it contained Sodium Lauryl Sulphate and that it was burning my scalp. So why is Mr Cohen still asking me to use this shampoo that has been found to cause hair and scalp problems and which he knew about.
22) Wanted me to renew my contract, saying that he has a special topical solution
As part of the scam, Mr Cohen knew that our 12-month contract of $3900 was at an end, and he knew that I had not grown any hair, but he still wanted me to pay him $2700 to sign up again for a second year. What could that money be for? If Mr Cohen is to obey the Prohibition Orders, then he cannot supply me any medications, so why would he charge me $2700? For what? I believe that he is still practicing his scam, and telling me and others that he has special Indian Curries, saying that nobody can make his solution apart from his chemist, which means that he is still operating in a way that has him involved with medications. He has not grasped the seriously of the Prohibition Orders.
23) Telling me that I am to remain on medications indefinitely
Upon asking about the length of time that I need to remain on the non-approved medications, Mr Cohen said that I would need to be on his treatment for quote a long time. Mr Cohen is making these risky decisions on behalf of my GP. He is admitting that his whole business operation cannot exist without these medications. This means that IHRB should not be in business because it is the over-dosing of non-approved and dangerous products, combined simultaneously, to produce cosmetic hair regrowth that will fall out the moment a client stops taking the medications.
24) Telling me to take instructions from him about Proscar and Loniten
About using Proscar and Loniten, Mr Cohen said that I should not change the dosages or medications until he tells me what to do. This is yet another example of Mr Cohen directing me and showing no respect to my GP. He is saying that he will be the one to tell me what to do, when in fact that should be the role of my GP.
25) Wanted me to take a dangerous combination of medications for cosmetic effect
Why was Mr Cohen directing me to take high doses of non-approved products? He wanted my hair to show a rapid cosmetic improvement so that he can keep charging me for another year’s contract at $2700 and to avoid a request for a refund of my initial $3900 which he said came with a full guarantee. I did not grow any hair during the 12 months of using his Minoxidil/Retin-A solution that he sold me at $3900 on the basis that it contained his secret Indian Curries and herbs. So now at the end of our first year’s contract, Mr Cohen admitted that my hair had not grown. He admitted that he was not satisfied with the result, but that he wanted me to pump-up the medications so that I can see amazing results in under two months. I asked Mr Cohen if he was going to take photos of my head because that is what he always tells everyone to do in all his ads; and it is his general advice about any treatment for clients to insist upon photos. But he refused to take the photos, stating that he was not happy and that was why he wanted me to use Loniten and Proscar because he wanted turbo boost my hair growth first.
After a year on his program, with no hair growth, Mr Cohen insisted that the ‘textures’ had improved, admitting that no hair had grown, saying it was not a great result, but he made up a lie about my hair looking better, even though no hair had grown.
At no time did Mr Cohen tell me that Retin-A opens up the scalp and forces Minoxidil into my system. I was suffering a range of ailments and I went to see my GP out my illness, but at no time did I associate the two. I had no idea that Minoxidil was getting into my system to make me weak and ill. At no time did Mr Cohen warn me that topical Minoxidil is no longer considered topical when Retin-A is used. It enters the system, and medical experts say that the moment this happens, a patient must be treated as if the patient were taking Minoxidil by mouth. So we have Mr Cohen wanting to overdose me on Loniten tablets, on up to 10% Minoxidil with Retin-A plus Finasteride, all combined to achieve a cosmetic boost, but at no time did he tell me that 80% of blood-pressure patients (who would only take Loniten as a last resort after trying every other medication at its full strength) would see unwanted hair growth as an adverse side-effect, and that such hair growth could be on any part of the body, even in undesirable areas. I have links to medical sites that prove these points about the dangers.
26) Unprofessional conduct to introduce sex and fornication into the conversation
At the end of the conversation, Mr Cohen started to make unprofessional remarks about sex and sex-drive and having sex every two hours with girls at parties. He said that Australian men and their friends are ‘poofters’ who stand in a corner, thereby, the girls are very much in need of sex. Mr Cohen said that he used to have sex with girls who lined up every two hours and that Australian men ignore their girls to such a degree that there are so many lesbians.
27) Commenting about laser therapy while unqualified to give an opinion
Mr Cohen then commented about laser therapy and says that companies who use laser are liars. I do not think that Mr Cohen should be giving advice about treatments, because he is not an authority on the subject.
28) IHRB’s website does not include the terms of the Order
Mr Cohen’s website has not been updated to reflect the demands placed upon him by the Prohibition Order. As you know, HCCC says, ‘If the practitioner advertises their services following the imposition of a prohibition order, they must include the terms of the Prohibition Order in the advertisement. They must also advise patients of the existence of the Order before treating them. Any failure to comply with these requirements is a criminal offence.’
Mr Cohen’s promotional website does not inform its readers of the terms of the Prohibition Order. The website also has a link to a PDF of a full-page ad that also does not comply with this requirement. These are ads. Via his extensive Google ‘Search Engine Optimisation’, he is attracting people to his website, and is therefore advertising via the website without complying with the Order and HCCC requirements.
29) Violated the Temporary Prohibition Order of October 2010
Incidentally, for your records, Mr Cohen ignored the first temporary eight-week Prohibition Order that HCCC served on him in October 2010, because Mr Cohen continued to advertise in the November 2010 edition of a Chinese publication called Sing Tao. He also violated that order by placing ads in Nine to Five Magazine on the 1st, 15th, and 29th of November 2010. None of the four ads listed the terms of the Order as required.
30) Sold S2 medication to a client after the Temporary Prohibition Order
I was told that during the hiatus, sandwiched between the Temporary Order and the Permanent Prohibition Order, Mr Cohen sold S2 medication to Mr Lxxx who wrote to HCCC, so you would have his letter on file. This just illustrates to the Commission the total disregard and disrespect that Mr Cohen has, that even after the police raid and the eight-week Order, he still acted illegally. With or without an Order, Mr Cohen was never supposed to sell medications. So with or without an Order, he should not have sold medications to Mr Lxxx who did not have a prescription of any kind. Even though it was an S2, Mr Cohen was flagrantly ignoring all that had transpired between him and the police raid and HCCC investigators and their warnings. The moment the Temporary Order was over, we have evidence that he was back to his old illegal method by selling S2 to Mr Lxxx, while spinning lies about his Indian Curries and herbs.
May I plead with you to investigate my claims and prosecute Mr Cohen to the full extent of the law. I would be happy to provide any additional information, or to meet with your investigators. Please let me know how I can assist.
As you know, Mr Cohen has not yet been charged for being in possession of the medications. The Assistant Commissioner of NSW Police wrote to Mr Nxxx (Appendix 6) saying that police had handed the matter to HCCC. Clearly, there is no stopping Mr Cohen, and if you can please recommend that he be charged, that would send a strong signal to Mr Cohen that what he is doing is harmful. He has been the luckiest man to escape so lightly.
On behalf of other victims, may I please urge you to look into all of these allegations.