24. Between 2014 and 2018, Respondent employed an individual, Omead M., in his practice. Omead M. was finishing medical school and applying for residencies during this time, but held no license in California, as a physician and surgeon, physician assistant or any other typeof health care provider. Respondent asserts that he did not refer to Omead M. as "doctor" and that he instructed Omead M. not to call himself, "doctor;''
25. According to Respondent, while under his supervision, Omead M. performed medical assistant activities not requiring a license, such as answering emails and writing history and physical findings. Throughout Omead M. 's email correspondences with Respondent's patients, Omead M. states that he is under the supervision of Respondent, and refers to himself and is referred to as "Dr. Omead."
This document also lists what some patients went through. They reported Dr. Elist to the Medical Board, and this document details how Dr. Elist departed from the standard of care.
Here's an example:
Respondent committed an extreme departure from the standard of care when he failed to take action to have Patient 1 urgently evaluated when, on December 3, 2018, Patient l emailed Respondent photographs clinically suspicious for post-operative infection. Instead, Respondent suggested he apply Neosporin.
Respondent's care and treatment of Patient l further departed from the standard of care as follows:
A. Respondent diagnosed Patient I with PDD without a proper evaluation - specifically, without obtaining or performing a formal psychological evaluation of Patient 1, or making a referral to a mental health professional. Respondent then recommended implant surgery even though the physical examination did not support the chief complaint or assessment.
B. Respondent documented planning a release of the suspensory ligament for Patient 1, even though this procedure is not considered safe.
C. After documenting in Patient 1 's note, "tight suspensory ligament," Respondent then failed to document any description of the suspensory ligament in Patient I's operative notes. Instead, in the operative case dictations it is stated: "suspensory ligament was identified and preserved." Respondent's documentation is inconsistent and inaccurate and appears template when compared to that of his other patients.
D. Respondent had Patient 1 sign a "Release of Claims" in exchange for performing future removal surgery at no cost.
E. Respondent offered Patient 1 a monetary payment in exchange for removing Patient 1 's social media posts regarding the care and treatment he received from Respondent.
--->No wonder, it's hard for me to find negative reviews on Yelp and Google Reviews.
The "Prayer" section on the page final page of this document states:
WHEREFORE, Complainant requests that a hearing be held on the matters herein alleged, and that following the hearing, the Medical Board of California issue a decision:
1. Revoking or suspending Physician's and Surgeon's Certificate Number A 35400, issued to Respondent James Jamshid Elist, M.D.;
2. Revoking, suspending or denying approval of Respondent James Jamshid Elist, M.D.'s authority to supervise physician assistants and advanced practice nurses;
3. Ordering Respondent James Jamshid Elist, M.D., to pay the Board the costs of the investigation and enforcement of this case, and if placed on probation, the costs of probation monitoring; and
4. Taking such other and further action as deemed necessary and proper.
--->I want to SINCERELY thank Phalloboard for saving my life. I was NOT aware that Medical Board's investigating this doctor until I found phalloboards. I also want to thank those patients who're willing to provide clinical information to the board's investigators. I don't think that I'll have Penuma done anymore. Sigh.