Kroll's mole-role trolls

The CMAJ editorial [LINK] mentioned that they had noted that some 'researchers' occasionally neglect to mention their close connections to Taser.

"The scientific literature bears witness to a small group of dedicated researchers who diligently write letters to journals pointing out flaws in studies reporting harm from tasers. Unfortunately, some of these researchers occasionally neglect to mention their participation on TASER International’s medical advisory board or board of directors. 11,12"

The two references 11 and 12 are as follows:

11. Kroll M, Luceri RM, Calkins H. A very interesting case study involving a TASER conducted electrical weapon (CEW) used on a patient with a pacemaker. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2007;18:E29-30.
12. Kroll MW, Calkins H, Luceri RM. Electronic control devices and the clinical milieu. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;49:732-3.

So he occasionally neglects to mention that has been on the Taser Board of Directors since 2003. He sometimes also forgets to mention that he is (was?) Chairman of their in-house so-called Medical Advisory Board. There is normally no proactive disclosure* of the many tens of thousands of stock options that he has been presented with (worth more if the stock goes up, worth less if the stock goes down).

[*The stock options are - of course - disclosed in the legal sense in the applicable SEC filings. I'm referring to being forthright with the parties to his various communications: e-mails or published articles or letters.]

And this isn't the first time that he's been caught neglecting to declare his Taser connections.

Wired, June 2007: "One title Kroll neglects to put in his sig -- or mention in his note -- is that he's also on the board of Taser International." [LINK]

And these are just the examples that I've stumbled across. I don't know if there are other examples...

But if you walk past a haystack and spot a couple of needles, then the haystack is likely to contain more than just a couple of needles.

So, what do you think?