Medical Watchdog Blasts VCU After Nurse Fired for Viral TikToks Suggesting Drugging ICE Agents

A medical watchdog organization unleashed scathing criticism of Virginia Commonwealth University Thursday after a nurse at the institution's hospital was fired for posting TikTok videos that went viral for suggesting the use of paralytic drugs, poison ivy, and laxatives against Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents.

"As we've documented at Do No Harm, VCU has a long history of pushing extreme identity politics into medical education and clinical treatment," Do No Harm executive director Kristina Rasmussen told Fox News Digital. "Now, they act surprised when radicalism sprouts from a ground seeded with toxic ideology."

The organization, which represents employees and students in the medical field as well as patients and policymakers fighting to keep identity politics out of medical education, research and clinical practice, argues that VCU Health's termination of nurse Malinda Rose Cook represents insufficient accountability for an institution that has systematically prioritized political activism over medical professionalism.

"When medical schools and hospitals allow radical politics to shape curriculum, they end up training harmful activists rather than skilled medical professionals," Rasmussen continued. "VCU Health firing this nurse is the bare minimum response. Unless they clean up their act, how will any patient feel safe walking through their doors?"

The Viral Videos: Sabotage Tactics and Chemical Weapons

On Tuesday night, a compilation of Cook's TikTok videos was shared by popular X account LibsOfTikTok, triggering immediate controversy and investigation by VCU Health administrators.

In one video captioned simply "#ice #resistance #sabotage," the nurse, dressed in scrubs, instructed viewers to use what she called a "sabotage tactic" against opponents.

"I thought of something good," Cook said in the video. "Sabotage tactic, or at least scare tactic. All the medical providers, grab some syringes with needles on the end. Have them full of saline or succinylcholine, you know, whatever. Whatever. That will probably be a deterrent. Be safe."

Succinylcholine is a powerful anesthetic that causes rapid, short-acting muscle paralysis. The paralytic effect typically lasts four to six minutes and is used in medical settings for procedures requiring temporary muscle relaxation. The suggestion to weaponize this controlled substance represents a serious breach of medical ethics and potentially criminal intent.

In another video, Cook suggested using poison ivy as a "resistance tactic," explaining that by mixing poison ivy or poison oak with water, it could be turned into a spray to infect opponents. "Aim for faces, hands," she instructed viewers.

A third video gave what Cook characterized as "resistance tips for single women," encouraging them to use dating apps to identify ICE agents and incapacitate them.

"Single ladies, where these ICE guys are going, have a chance to do something, you know, not without risk, but could help the cause for sure," Cook said. "Get on Tinder, get on Hinge, find these guys. They're around. [If] they're an ICE agent, bring some ex-lax and put it in their drinks. Get them sick. You know, nobody's going to die. Just enough to incapacitate them and get them off the street for the next day. Highly, easily deniable."

Cook also suggested targeting ICE agents at their hotels and meals. "I'm just saying, let's get them where they eat. Somebody's not going to be supporting these guys. Where's the hotel where they eat? Who makes that breakfast? Let's find them. Let's make their lives f—— miserable."

Swift Institutional Response

VCU Health opened an investigation Tuesday morning after the videos surfaced, calling the posts "highly inappropriate" and immediately placing Cook on administrative leave.

Less than 12 hours later, the hospital announced Cook had been fired, bringing her employment at the Richmond institution to an abrupt end.

VCU Health did not return a Wednesday comment request from Fox News Digital seeking additional information about the termination, whether the matter had been referred to law enforcement, or what steps the institution plans to take to prevent similar incidents.

Do No Harm's Documentation of VCU's "DEI Problem"

The swift termination might have ended the story at most institutions, but Do No Harm argues that VCU's nurse scandal represents predictable consequences of the university's systemic embrace of what the organization characterizes as divisive identity politics.

Do No Harm has extensively documented VCU's commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives, publishing multiple reports and analyses exposing what the group views as ideological capture of medical education at the Richmond institution.

In March 2025, Do No Harm published an analysis titled "VCU Health's DEI Problem," revealing that almost 400 VCU Medical Center job descriptions contain references to "diversity," including requirements in desired qualifications and duties.

The job description for VCU's Vice President and Chief Medical Officer of Health System Transformation, for example, requires candidates to demonstrate "ability to leverage diversity in functional skills, experience levels and backgrounds for innovation." The Chief Medical Officer role states candidates should have "Diversity Equity and Inclusion certification."

Do No Harm also obtained lesson plans from VCU School of Medicine's "Advanced Research Mentoring Programs," which the organization characterizes as essentially focused on DEI ideology. Activity titles include "Reflecting on Diversity," "Reflect on Unconscious Assumptions," "Implications of Diversity Research," and case studies discussing "Equity and Inclusion."

According to program descriptions, these sessions are designed to help faculty "recognize the potential impact of conscious and unconscious assumptions, preconceptions, biases, and prejudices on the mentor-mentee relationship and reflect on how to manage them."

The DICE Inventory: 94.4 Percent Score

In April 2023, Do No Harm published VCU School of Medicine's DICE (Diversity, Inclusion, and Community Engagement) Inventory Score of 94.4 percent, based on the institution's own survey response to the Association of American Medical Colleges.

The score reflects extensive institutional commitment to DEI programming across admissions, curriculum, faculty evaluation, and administrative operations. Do No Harm obtained VCU's AAMC survey response through freedom of information requests, arguing that Virginia taxpayers funding the institution deserve transparency about its priorities.

The analysis revealed that VCU School of Medicine's Office of Institutional Equity, Effectiveness, and Success is directly involved in promotion and tenure decisions, modifying guidelines "to include recognition of Community Engagement as an accepted criteria for evaluation."

Do No Harm characterizes this as "a litmus test that requires faculty to toe the party line instead of teaching medicine at the highest level," arguing that political alignment rather than medical expertise drives career advancement.

The institution's administrators have engaged in "state-level initiatives regarding required non-discrimination training with the Virginia Governor's Office," according to VCU's own documentation, suggesting extensive political involvement beyond medical education.

2024 Admissions Guidelines: Rewarding "Diversity"

Do No Harm obtained 2024 admissions guidelines from VCU School of Medicine revealing that the institution continues to reward "diversity" in the admissions process, potentially prioritizing demographic characteristics over academic qualifications or medical aptitude.

The organization also documented a VCU School of Medicine lecture featuring what Do No Harm characterizes as "flat-out misleading claims" including: "Underrepresented Minority Physicians Are More Likely to Serve the Underserved," "Minority Patients Are More Likely to Follow the Recommendations of Minority Physicians," "Diversity on Research Teams Enhances Impact of Research," and "A Diverse Physician Workforce Will Reduce Racial Healthcare Disparities."

Do No Harm disputes these claims in a separate research project titled "Major DEI Studies, Major Flaws," arguing that the studies commonly cited to support diversity initiatives in medicine often have serious methodological issues casting doubt on their findings.

The Broader Context: National Battle Over DEI in Medicine

The VCU nurse scandal and Do No Harm's institutional critique occur within a broader national debate about the role of diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives in medical education and healthcare delivery.

Do No Harm, established in April 2022, has rapidly gained recognition with 16,000 members including doctors, nurses, physicians, and concerned citizens across all 50 states and 14 countries. The organization has achieved over 10,000 media hits in top-tier publications while documenting DEI initiatives at medical schools nationwide.

In comprehensive research titled "Activism Instead of Anatomy: The Sorry State of Medical School Curricula," Do No Harm revealed that 23 of America's top 25 medical schools now have anti-racism instruction as a core part of their curriculum, representing what critics characterize as political indoctrination replacing rigorous medical training.

A March 2025 report titled "Unethical Expectations: How Accreditors Inject Identity Politics into Medical and Healthcare Education" highlighted how accrediting bodies impose DEI requirements on medical programs, with some explicitly requiring dedicated DEI offices as conditions of accreditation.

The American Osteopathic Association's Commission on Osteopathic College Accreditation, for instance, explicitly requires dedicated DEI programs and offices for colleges of osteopathic medicine to be accredited, effectively mandating political commitments as prerequisites for medical education.

Accreditor Pushback: Signs of Change

However, a July 2025 Do No Harm follow-up report found that seven of ten medical and healthcare education accreditors have either eliminated diversity requirements, proposed eliminating them, or pledged not to enforce these requirements following President Trump's executive order to reform accreditation.

The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education suspended enforcement of two key diversity requirements, citing state DEI bans. The Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education removed diversity requirements and the phrase "diversity, equity, and inclusion" from its standards entirely.

"We are pleased that many of the accreditors responsible for injecting identity politics into medical education are backing off their DEI requirements," said Stanley Goldfarb, MD, Chairman of Do No Harm. "While these early results are encouraging, there is still much work to be done to rid our institutions entirely of the rot of racial politics."

Legal and Ethical Questions

Legal analysts have suggested that Cook's videos could potentially expose her to criminal liability. Suggesting the use of controlled substances to incapacitate federal law enforcement officers, creating chemical weapons from poison ivy, or advocating for drugging individuals without consent all raise serious legal questions.

Whether prosecutors will pursue charges remains unclear. VCU Health's statement did not indicate whether the institution has referred the matter to law enforcement or cooperated with any investigation.

Beyond potential criminal liability, Cook's videos raise profound questions about medical ethics and professional responsibility. Healthcare professionals take oaths to "do no harm" and are bound by ethical codes prohibiting the weaponization of medical knowledge or substances.

The videos suggest not merely political disagreement with immigration enforcement but willingness to violate fundamental medical ethics in service of political objectives—precisely the outcome Do No Harm warns results from allowing "radical politics to shape curriculum."

Patient Trust and Institutional Credibility

Rasmussen's pointed question—"how will any patient feel safe walking through their doors?"—highlights potential consequences beyond Cook's individual termination.

If patients perceive that VCU Health employees might prioritize political activism over medical ethics, trust in the institution could erode. Healthcare delivery fundamentally depends on patients trusting that medical professionals will act in their best interests regardless of political disagreements.

The scandal also raises questions about institutional vetting and supervision. How did Cook's views escape notice before she posted videos to a public platform? What oversight mechanisms exist to ensure healthcare professionals maintain ethical boundaries? Are there other employees whose political commitments might compromise patient care?

VCU Health's silence in response to media inquiries leaves these questions unanswered, potentially compounding reputational damage from the initial scandal.

The Debate Over DEI in Medicine

Defenders of diversity initiatives argue they address legitimate disparities in healthcare access and outcomes, prepare medical professionals to serve diverse populations, and create inclusive environments where all students and patients feel valued.

Research does document persistent healthcare disparities along racial and socioeconomic lines, though experts dispute whether DEI programming effectively addresses root causes versus serving primarily as political signaling.

Critics like Do No Harm contend that DEI initiatives prioritize demographic characteristics over competence, inject divisive politics into medical education, and distract from the fundamental mission of training skilled physicians. They argue that excellence in medical care should transcend political considerations and that patients deserve doctors selected and trained based solely on ability.

The Cook incident provides ammunition for critics arguing that political activism in medical settings creates concrete dangers. When healthcare professionals view medical knowledge and substances as potential weapons for political causes, the ethical foundations of medicine erode.

Looking Ahead

VCU Health faces difficult questions about institutional culture and accountability. Do No Harm's call for the institution to "clean up their act" implies that firing one nurse insufficiently addresses systemic issues.

Whether VCU will respond to Do No Harm's broader critique of its DEI initiatives remains unclear. Virginia's political landscape, with competing priorities between progressive educational institutions and conservative state leadership, complicates potential reforms.

For Do No Harm, the VCU nurse scandal represents validation of warnings the organization has issued for nearly three years: that allowing political ideology to infiltrate medical education produces harmful consequences extending beyond campus debates into real-world healthcare delivery.

As the national debate over DEI in medicine intensifies, the VCU case study will likely feature prominently in arguments about the risks of prioritizing political commitments over medical professionalism and ethical practice.