Only Sam Cohen can toast ice

Only Sam Cohen can toast ice

Print This Post Print This Post

In my opinion, Mr Sam Cohen of IHRB is the Lance Armstrong of the hair-loss industry. We heard how Armstrong kept denying everything for years; until he spilled the beans to Oprah. Mr Cohen seems to operate within the same kind of delusional framework. His fanciful explanation of what happened, seems to know no limits. Mr Cohen’s summary on his website paints a remarkable picture through which he protests his innocence.

The link on IHRB's website, boasting about the 'Successful & Satisfying 10th Anniversarys' (sic).

The link on IHRB’s website, boasting about the ‘Successful & Satisfying 10th Anniversarys’ (sic).

On his website (which he has been asked to modify due to the ‘unlawful, misleading and unverified claims’) Mr Cohen has published his account of what had transpired between him and me. It fascinates me that he can cook-up such a story whose grand delusion is akin to someone trying to toast ice. Toasting ice is not possible on planet Earth, but seemingly plausible in the dark recesses of Mr Cohen’s mind.

Let’s review each sentence so that you can see how marvellously Mr Sam Cohen can spin his yarns which have paid him many dividends, because he has managed to pull the wool over the eyes of many people, including some Authorities. His strategy of spinning lies pays handsomely due to his ability to present what seems like convincing arguments. Of course, it’s all tish and pish. The green text below is directly from the website of the Institute of Hair Regrowth & Beauty, with typos left in. The black text is my response.


When many large companies & organisations have gone & are going broke, against all the odds & adversities, thanks to the hundreds of “satisfied & loyal” customers, along with our “effective” products, Sam Cohen & IHRB, “is still standing strong”. It gives me more pleasure that, even after an incessant & vilifying campaign by “Jonar Nader”, since 11.09.08 & still continuing, “the little Aussie battler” Sam Cohen & IHRB keeps on keeping on.

It is interesting that Mr Cohen should boast about his on-going success in this way, when in other documents which he sends to the Authorities, he alleges that my efforts to expose his illegal practices are sending him broke. During Tribunal hearings he tells Members and clients that he can’t afford to pay any refunds, and that if he were to refund any money, it would have to come out of his personal pocket because he alleges that his company IHRB has no money. I guess it’s a different swan-song depending on the audience. Mr Cohen keeps accusing me of vilifying him. The word ‘vilify’ refers to someone writing or speaking in an abusively disparaging manner. Everything on this website is factual. I am not sure how facts constitute vilification.


1. lied about his name on the ‘confidential questionnaire’, on his first visit on 11.09.08, enrolling as a customer. calling himself ‘JK’, instead of ‘Jonar Nader’.

2. after an hour’s consultation and discussion, agreed to accept our hair regrowth program. again, lied about his name and signed the ‘agreement’ as ‘JK’.

3. lied again when signed the ‘before’ photographs of his hair & scalp, as ‘jk’.

I had responded to Mr Cohen’s ridiculous claims before, and you can read much of it at this link. Whenever he tells the story, he starts out by suggesting that I had lied about my name. He gets excited to suggest that I somehow, from day-one, had gone-in to deceive him and was, according to him, out to expose him and harm his business. Mr Cohen loves emphasising that I had signed my name as JK. Of course, if he were to inspect my signatures, he would see that they are all consistent and legitimate. The signature I signed on his dubious contract is the signature I sign on every contract. I have only one signature. It was the same signature that I had used on the back of my American Express card which he and his secretary/receptionist had checked before processing my Amex card transaction for $3,700. I paid Mr Cohen using my American Express card. The name on the card was JK. It was a legitimate card. It was my card. The name on the card was JK and the signature was my authentic signature. Mr Cohen seems to think that I lied about my name in order to harm him. Mr Cohen got paid. He abused me and tricked me and caused me harm and more hair-loss than ever before. He lied to me about his Indian Curries which I now believe do not exist, and which his three pharmacists have sworn do not exist. I had explained this matter of my name before. However, Mr Cohen just loves to be able to spin the drama around my having used a different name. What he does not realise, is that I had used that name for decades. As a public figure who works in a range of safe and dangerous industries, I protect myself in the general public by not using my real name unless I have to. As you can see from the Amex card below, I have been using that name for a long time, and on my Amex card since the year 2000 — approximately eight years before I had the misfortune of clapping my eyes on him. As an Australian, I had a Platinum Amex Card from the USA as opposed to from the Australian Office. I had a Platinum card long before Platinum was introduce into Australia. I was one of only 25 Australians to have a Platinum card directly from the USA, long before it was launched in Australia. For him to continue to suggest that I had somehow lied, is defamatory. I visited his office and gave him my name on a form as JK because it was none of his business who I was or what I did for a living, especially when he was showing me other people’s private files and telling me their most intimate and private details about their sexuality, proclivities, profession, and their faulty penis  — with files wide open for me to see every detail! I was well justified to not want him to know who I am, let he boat that an author is on his books! I gave him an Amex card in the name of JK with my signature, as I do with most people who have no reason to know who I am and what I do. It is not their business. Amex paid him and he pocketed my hard-earned money. So what’s his problem? Whether my name is Tom, Dick, or Harry, how does that change the ghastly ingredients in his expensive useless bottles?

I met Mr Cohen in 2008 and paid him using my Amex card in the name of JK which I had been using since the year 2000. Yet he still thinks I came in and lied about my name. This is the name I use in general transactions because it is none of his business what my real name is. Just like I bet that SAM is not his real and original Indian name which his parents gave to him at birth.

I met Mr Cohen in 2008 and paid him using my Amex card in the name of JK which I had been using since the year 2000. Yet he still thinks I came in and lied about my name. This is the name I use in general transactions because it is none of his business what my real name is. Just like I bet that SAM is not his real and original Indian name which his parents gave to him at birth.


Before Mr Cohen starts to wonder if I am lying to my banks, he can check this out to see that my banks know exactly who I am, and they issue me with two cards that, apart from one being for JN and another for JK, they are 100% identical in every respect. The bank account links to the one single account using the same numbers, the same expiry dates, and even the same security number at the back.

Before Mr Cohen starts to wonder if I am lying to my banks, he can check this out to see that my banks know exactly who I am, and they issue me with two cards that, apart from one being for JN and another for JK, they are 100% identical in every respect. The bank account links to the one single account using the same numbers, the same expiry dates, and even the same security number at the back. I removed my signatures from the back for security reasons. However, my signatures are identical on both cards.


4. never applied the prescribed topical solution and never took prescription tablets. I have emails from him to prove this.

Mr Cohen illegally sold me medications that he was never licensed to sell. They caused me terrible rashes and pain. And I lost more hair than ever before. Upon learning about the failure of his program, he asked me to go to my doctor and request a prescription for Loniten and Proscar and Retin-A. My doctor refused on the basis that these are dangerous drugs that are NOT approved for hair regrowth! Therefore, the emails to which Mr Cohen is referring, state that my doctors were against his dangerous suggestions. So to say that I never applied the prescribed topical solution is wrong. I applied it (because he sold it to me illegally, claiming that it contained his secret Indian Curries) and when it was disastrous, he wanted me to inject my body with dangerous stuff that could cause heart failure and permanent erectile disfunction! I also have emails from him thereafter to say that he was ok with the fact that I was not taking the tablets. He knew that he could not push the matter. After 12 months, when my hair was worse than ever before, he refused to give me a refund. When I complained to the Department of Fair Trading, he spun lies to the Officer and said that I was supposed to stay on his useless program for three years. When people go to the Consumer Tribunal (CTTT) and tell of similar stories, Mr Cohen denies that he tells his clients that they needs to stay on his program for three years. I now have a letter from Fair Trading whereby the Officer confirms that Mr Cohen told them that a client needs to be on his program for three years. Yet, this very action of waiting for three years to see what happens, voids his useless guarantee which says that a customer must claim a refund in the first year. It is one big messy merry-go-round.

5. on 31.08.09, after 11 months, still lying about his name, sat in my office for ‘four & a half hours’, demanding a refund ‘on the spot’. i tried telling him that, even if we did refund, 2 (two) directors had to sign the cheque, which fell on ‘deaf ears’. finally, officers, constable Walsham and constable Axford (event no. c38466646), from the rocks police station had to come and remove him from my office.

I have my phone records to prove that on the day in question, I called his reception to say I was running a little late. So with that, and the time of the police report, we see that I was in his office for two hours and not 4.5 hours as he exaggerates. And the matter of him telling me (and he put it in writing to the Consumer Tribunal) that he could not issue a refund without TWO signatures, is another BIG FAT lie because I called his bank and ASIC and checked and found out that no such second signature exists. Sam Cohen started his business with a second director, but that director had resigned his active duties years before I met Mr Cohen. So for years, Sam Cohen was the ONLY single solitary signatory on any cheque. So he is lying here, as he lied to the Tribunal and in his written submissions. Sad sad sad lies. Then Mr Cohen says that two Police officers came to take me away. He is sorely mistaken. There were two Police units called that day. He called one and I called one. Mine came for my protection. By the time his arrived, I was no longer in his office. His Police unit noted that I was not there, and this is published in the Police report which is on file for anyone to obtain under the freedom of information. His Police unit noted that the POI (person of interest) was not in the office when they arrived. So Mr Cohen yet again whistles dixie.

6. he complained to the CTTT and received a ‘full refund’.

Oh dear that sounds simple. I complained to CTTT and Mr Cohen lied and lied. One of his many lies was taken-up by the Department of Fair Trading who took him to Court and now Mr Cohen has a criminal conviction for lying to the Tribunal. Due to his lies, my case at the Tribunal took 383 days before he found a loophole to terminate the case which had cost me an obscene amount of money in expenses. 383 days of Mr Cohen lying about every single solitary thing of significance. So for Mr Cohen to now say in Point 6 that I complained and received a refund, is absurd. He should say that I complained and fought tooth and nail and battled his ridiculous stories for 383 days at tremendous effort and stamina and only received my $3,700 after I finally worked-out his labyrinth of lies and I issued him with a Summons to furnish the ingredients (as he is required by law to have published for all his clients to see) which he called his Indian Curries. He engaged a solicitor who must had advised him to send me a cheque because Mr Cohen knew that the Summons would check-mate him and prove him to be the fraud that I keep alleging him to be. A full refund of $3700 hardly paid for my parking fees and postage stamps after what I had to go through to expose his lies. The Summons asked him to prove his ingredients. The TGA requires anyone selling therapeutic goods to have scientific evidence (which he does not) and list their ingredients every time on every bottle (which he never does) and have the products Registered with the TGA (which he never did) and have his advertisements approved by the TGA (which they never were), and only sell them via approved licensed channels (which he is not).

7. he also complained to the HCCC that. ‘I was selling drugs without prescriptions’. untrue.

Unbelievable brainpower behind this statement. First, Mr Cohen was never licensed to sell medication, with or without a prescription. He sold me dangerous Scheduled medications without a prescription. I walked in, heard his sales pitch, paid, walked out with medications! No doctor involved. And that was illegal, but I had no idea what he was selling, considering he insisted that it was his herbal secret safe natural extracts! Far from it. He sold it to many others. We have electronic surveillance of him selling the drugs to people who had no prescription. The Health Care Complaints Commission published its report and found the massive irregularities and issued Mr Cohen and IHRB with a Permanent Prohibition Order. Yes Mr Cohen did have prescriptions in his office. But a Mr Smith would give him a prescription which he would use for a Mr Jones. Technically he did have prescriptions which the HCCC found had been tampered with — big time. The irregularities were massive. Having a prescription in his office does not make anything better. He should never have touched them in the first place. When the Police raided Mr Cohen’s IHRB office, they found hundreds of doses of medications which he was never permitted to have or store or sell. He would sell them to anyone off the street. As the HCCC Commissioner had noted, Mr Cohen was endangering people’s health and safety. While Commission investigators were searching his office, they found a package at reception, awaiting collection by a courier. The package was addressed to a customer, say a Mr Smith, yet the medications inside were dispensed for a Mr Jones. This is proof of how he hoards prescriptions to facilitate his supply-line. When questioned about them, Mr Cohen said that it was a mistake. Yeh, sure. This is how he tried to worm his way out of so many situations, that the Commissioner of HCCC wrote that Mr Cohen is ‘not a reliable witness’ which is legal-speak for, Mr Cohen cannot be trusted to answer a question truthfully!

8. on 22.09.10, 8 or 10 federal police officers & 3 or 4 officers from the HCCC came and confiscated some products and documents.

9. the very next day, while coming out of my car park, a reporter and crew of ‘today tonight’ from channel 7 came to photograph and question me in the foyer of my office. i tried to explain the reasons and that all was not true. I was told that Nader is a highly respected person. he is a professor, lecturer and a writer. I brought the reporter & crew in to my office, showed them documents on Nader, which fell on deaf years. on 24.11.10, today tonight showed this on their program. they allowed Nader ‘a free run’, where he again lied about applying prescribed topical solutions and prescription tab lets. today tonight also stated that, “police raids to shut one operator down”. untrue- we were never ‘shut down’.

Indeed IHRB was raided and Police found heaps of stuff that was reported on the TV show ‘Today Tonight’. The material that Mr Cohen showed the TV reporter did not fall on deaf ears. The reporter took the matter to Channel 7’s legal team. He considered Mr Cohen’s statements carefully. For this reason, the TV report was delayed — a fact that Mr Cohen was not aware of until this moment because this is the first time that I had revealed this. However, what Mr Cohen had told the senior TV reporter was just like everything else Mr Cohen utters: lies and deceptive statements. Mr Cohen was so convincing that the TV reported called me and said that he did not think he could run the story. My heart sank. The TV reporter was one of the most experienced and most hardened of reporters. He had been around the world and dealt with the biggest scams of all. For him to be stumped by Mr Cohen shows illustrated the power of Mr Cohen’s deceit. In the end, the reporter saw through the amazingly convincing lies, and the Sydney show was aired nationally!

10. Nader also took out an AVO on me, alleging that he’s scared that i will kill him. so worried, he had to be hospitalised. case was dismissed & he had to pay me $1500.00

Yes I took out an AVO (PVO) and I lost the request because Mr Cohen’s lawyer made out that I was harassing him. They turned the tables. Clever legal rubbish. However, this is easily settled. Mr Cohen denies saying that he could have me knocked off. Just ask him to permit the holder of an audio file to release the file. While a customer was recording the conversation with Mr Cohen, he was caught on tape describing that he could have me knocked off, but he can’t do it just yet, lest people immediately suspect it was him who had done it. So ask Mr Cohen to prove his innocence by asking him to give us permission to publish the tape! We have a lot of audio surveillance of Mr Cohen. More than he knows about. It was legal for the person to have recorded them. It is just illegal to publish then without a Court’s directive, so we shall look forward to the day when a judge admits the audio files into evidence. Then we will see who had lied to clients, lied to the Police, lied to the media, lied to the Authorities, and lied to the Commissioner of HCCC to whom Mr Cohen said that a client had stolen medications, when in fact surveillance proves that Mr Cohen had illegally sold those dangerous medications to the client without a prescription! And even if a prescription had existed, it would still have been an illegal sale of dangerous non-approved products which indeed do grow hair on most heads — the heads we see in IHRB’s unlawful ads! The medications do work at great medical risk. Mr Cohen dispenses hard-core medications and when hair does grow, he takes the credit and says it was his secret Indian Curries and natural extracts. No, the hair grew thanks to medications already on the market at a fraction of the price that Mr Cohen sells them.

11. Nader also accuses me of lying about the addition of my ‘natural extracts’ in the topical solution. i have signed agreements by the 2 (two) previous chemists, labels on the bottles, stating this and acknowledgement by the HCCC.

This lie is best explained if you click here, so I’ll keep it short and invite you to read the truth at the links. All three pharmacists have stated in Affidavits and return-on-summons that no such intellectual property or efficacious secret extracts had ever been used by them in any of the bottles they dispensed, despite Mr Cohen insisting that the pharmacists all did compound his secret Indian Curries. Now Mr Cohen accuses his pharmacists of lying.

12. Nader set up a website using my name by adding ‘au’ to further glorify his character assassinating mission.

I used a range of sites to expose what I allege is a scam. It is not character assassination when a consumer advocate tries to expose an alleged scam. Just like Lance Armstrong kept insisting that he never used performance-enhancing drugs and sued newspapers who dared to suggest it, and just like Bernard Madoff kept protesting his innocent until it all came out, we see Mr Cohen trying anything to cover-up his many dubious activities which the Authorities have already discovered.

13. he is so obsessed that, in one of his emails, he stated that, he is watching every move i make and written approximately 2500 pages on his websites.

People are being hurt medically and financially. Indeed, I am observing Mr Cohen who spins untruths as he deceives tribunals and courts. Just take a look at the lies I uncovered in this one document for example.

Even Ashley & Martin has jumped on the “band wagon” to take a shot at me, in their website, amongst other things, stating, “fortunately, the NSW health department have stopped him from trading” absolutely untrue.

It is perfectly true that Mr Cohen has been issued with Sanctions and Orders. If he obeys the Sanctions and Orders, he would have to publish apologies in dozens of publications, and he would have to take down his website because it is filled with breaches of the law, and he would have nothing to sell other than his useless shampoo. So if Mr Cohen does not understand that he has been shut-down in every practical sense, then he can still paint his office door with a logo and print business card and insist that he is still in business. Indeed he is still selling. In my opinion, he is fleecing innocent people of money for bottles they can buy on the market for $7. He charges $200 and $900 for products that people can buy elsewhere at a fraction of the price, and legally! Mr Cohen will say that people can buy pharmacy products without a prescription, so what he is selling them is something that anyone can otherwise buy, so he reasons that he is not breaking the law. He is logic is woolly. People can buy cigarettes quite easily, but it is a criminal offence to sell cigarettes without a license. We can buy alcohol, but we cannot sell it. We can buy medications, but we cannot sell it! Mr Cohen has NO license, and has no qualifications, and has been found to have broken all the rules, and has been ordered to stop. Has he stopped? No. As the final line below say, he is still going strong. Indeed he is… illegally!


Comments are closed.