Rating Feedback for Dr. Gelman (1568766)

The rating:
'Having an M.D. myself and having consulted with various colleagues, it was very clear what the operation I needed was. I did not want someone I knew to perform the operation and for obvious reasons I could not perform the operation myself. I went to Dr. Gelman for the textbook procedure but he was surprisingly unfamiliar with how to do it. This came as a shock, but it seems that he is limited to his very small niche practice area within reconstructive urology. I am surprised he is still allowed to have his license since some of his suggestions could have been incredibly dangerous. Someone without medical training might have fallen for it and opted for surgery. A very dangerous man - definitely always seek a second opinion or even third before committing to a surgery with him.'
(http://www.ratemds.com/doctor-ratings/951431)
---------------------------------------------------------
This is a fake/sham review. I did not recall a patient (M.D) who could be the poster. I reviewed our patient database, which can be searched by "Mr." vs "Dr.", insurance carrier etc. I have seen 38 doctors (which includes M.D.s, dentists etc) and confirmed I have never seen an M.D. with Aetna insurance, or any M.D. who could possibly be the author of this comment. In reading these comments, I do not find the statements and conclusions logical. This individual, who claims to be a physician, stated that he did his homework and came to me for a very specific procedure. This man suggested he was â??shockedâ?? to learn that I was unfamiliar with conditions outside my practice area. I have no idea why a doctor would seek me out for a â??textbook procedureâ?? outside of my area of expertise. My practice has always been limited to male urethral-genital surgery (male urethral strictures, penile curvature correction, penile implants, etc.). That is made very clear in my website and on the University of California, Irvine Department of Urology website. If I see and evaluate a patient and determine he is best served with a procedure unrelated to my sub-specialty, I will recommend that he see someone else who is best qualified to do that procedure. This post does not really provide an example of anything I suggested that was not good advice. However, if a doctor truly had a reason to believe I was dangerous and should not have a license, then he should file a complaint with the California Medical Board. Also, as I am Board Certified by the American Board of Urology, he should inform the Board of this concern as the purpose of the Board is to protect the public. I cannot really tell what would motivate someone to post a sham review. I can only guess. Perhaps this was a man (not an M.D.) who came to me expecting a procedure that I did not think was the right thing to do and that he was best served with a procedure outside of my expertise. Occasionally this happens. I am sorry, but I only am willing to do what I think is the right thing to do and what is within my sub-specialty. It is always to my personal advantage to do procedures, but my priority is to do what is best for my patients.