Roger Coghill is back.

Pragmatist said:
Tip of the iceberg!

He's affiliated with dozens of protest and activist groups.
He acts as a "consultant" on radiation hazards (don't laugh)
He owns the bloody journal!
He sells friggin' Melatonin (allegedly - we still don't know if there's any melatonin IN the crap he sells!).

And all this is disclosed WHERE exactly?

This is just TOO much!
Click to expand...
Pragmatist, sweetheart, you just aren't getting it. All the stuff about disclosure of interests isn't meant to apply to Roger - or even his best mates. I mean, we know Roger (thinks he) should be given credit for trying to do something to identify possible protective devices to combat these terrible risks! None of that is conflict of interest, none of that is what the instructions to authors is talking about. He's not in it to make money the way these evil vets are!

What that is about is people who have ever worked for a power company, or a mobile phone company or any company or institution which has any links at all with power companies or mobile phone companies. Or anyone with any connection at all to the sale of pharmaceuticals, which even seems to extend to acting in an advisory capacity to those who prescribe pharmaceuticals.

Which of course elegantly eliminates anyone who might know anything at all about the subjects on the card, from a non-woo perspective. As if anyone like that would want to publish there anyway!

Rolfe.

PS. OK, having just seen the last two posts, I grant you the Harmoniser[TM] lemon-juice experiment and similar endeavours.
 
Rolfe said:
Pragmatist, sweetheart, you just aren't getting it. All the stuff about disclosure of interests isn't meant to apply to Roger - or even his best mates. I mean, we know Roger (thinks he) should be given credit for trying to do something to identify possible protective devices to combat these terrible risks! None of that is conflict of interest, none of that is what the instructions to authors is talking about. He's not in it to make money the way these evil vets are!

What that is about is people who have ever worked for a power company, or a mobile phone company or any company or institution which has any links at all with power companies or mobile phone companies. Or anyone with any connection at all to the sale of pharmaceuticals, which even seems to extend to acting in an advisory capacity to those who prescribe pharmaceuticals.

Which of course elegantly eliminates anyone who might know anything at all about the subjects on the card, from a non-woo perspective. As if anyone like that would want to publish there anyway!

Rolfe.

PS. OK, having just seen the last two posts, I grant you the Harmoniser[TM] lemon-juice experiment and similar endeavours.
Click to expand...
Ohhh... now I get it. By "conflict of interest" they mean that which conflicts with Roger's interests. It all makes sense now.
 
Rolfe said:
Pragmatist, sweetheart, you just aren't getting it. Al;l the stuff about disclosure of interests isn't meant to apply to Roger - or even his best mates. I mean, we know Roger (thinks he) should be given credit for trying to do something to identify possible protective devices to combat these terrible risks! None of that is conflict of interest, none of that is what the instructions to authors is talking about.

What that is about is people who have ever worked for a power company, or a mobile phone company or any company or institution which has any links at all with power companies or mobile phone companies. Or anyone with any connection at all to the sale of pharmaceuticals, which even seems to extend to acting in an advisory capacity to those who prescribe pharmaceuticals.

Which of course elegantly eliminates anyone who might know anything at all about the subjects on the card, from a non-woo perspective. As if anyone like that would want to publish there anyway!

Rolfe.

PS. OK, having just seen the last two posts, I grant you the Harmoniser[TM] lemon-juice experiment and similar endeavours.
Click to expand...

Yep, you're right!

As for the lemon experiment etc., though, I think we can do MUCH better than that....! :D
 
Psiload said:
http://www.gainex.co.uk/index.htm

Gainex Magnetic Fuel Economiser

* Save up to 20% on your fuel costs

* Boosts engine performance

* Environmentally kind by lowering harmful exhaust emissions

* Cleans existing carbon deposits on your engine

Be sure to check out the Scientific Tests:

http://www.cogreslab.co.uk/gainextest.htm

And just how does Roger go about testing a device which is claimed to increase fuel efficiency in automobiles? By installing it in an automobile perhaps(tools are not even required for installation)?

Of course not...

By hooking it up to a Bunsen burner, using methane as fuel, and comparing it against A COMPETITOR'S MAGNETIC FUEL-SAVING GIZMO!!!

You've got to marvel at the kind of convoluted, fantastic, bizarro-world logic that Roger applies to testing such a simple, straight forward claim.
Click to expand...


ASA adjudication on Gainex

Gainex said it was not their policy to respond to complaints made by anonymous complainants. They said they had data to support their claims but were unwilling to provide it. They suggested that the ASA or the complainant purchase the product and carry out their own testing. They pointed out that they had only ever received one complaint from a customer about their product.
Click to expand...


Complaints upheld.
 
Last edited:
I heard some little time ago that Rogen is now no longer connected with the Institute (now Society) of Biology. I don't know the details.

I also note that most of the internal links on his home page are now dead. The links to selling his silly books and magnets are live, but the whole site looks a bit of a cobweb.

Rolfe.
 
I think A Coghill thread was one of the first ones I properly engaged in.

I'm feeling all nostalgic now.
 
I saw the "Roger Coghill is back." in the new posts screen and thought he had just returned - damn you Mojo.

Good news on the Gainex stuff, it really does seem as this change with the ASA will have a positive effect.
 
Who what now? As long as you're resurrecting the thread, want to fill us in? The links to the other thread are dead.
 
X said:
Who what now? As long as you're resurrecting the thread, want to fill us in? The links to the other thread are dead.
Click to expand...


http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=22595

The start of that thread has some posts missing because of some sort of forum glitch. They can be found in this older version: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=21875

See also: http://www.skepticreport.com/sr/?p=554

ETA: he also showed up in the comments to these:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/jun/28/sciencenews.mobilephones
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/jul/05/pollution
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/jul/12/medicalresearch
 
Last edited:
Darat said:
I saw the "Roger Coghill is back." in the new posts screen and thought he had just returned - damn you Mojo.
Click to expand...
Same here!

I guess that since we are all attracted to this subject, we are missing the entertainment that he provided.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom