She had invasive surgery after Idaho Dr. Ryan Cole misdiagnosed her — now she’s suing

J.B. was depressed after losing her brother to COVID-19. Her menstrual cycle was out of whack, and while she assumed that was from stress and grief, her husband worried it might be something else and wanted her to see her nurse practitioner about the bleeding.

At the time, Dr. Ryan Cole ran one of the laboratories used by women’s health practices in the Boise area. That’s where J.B.’s nurse practitioner sent a biopsy taken from her body on July 6, 2021.

Cole gave a diagnosis: a rare and aggressive form of endometrial cancer.

“I felt like I died already” upon hearing the diagnosis, J.B. told the Idaho Capital Sun in an interview. “You know, you know. It was scary,” she said, beginning to cry. “Oh, sorry. I don’t want to even, like, remember it.”

The Sun agreed to use only J.B.’s initials to protect her medical privacy.

It wasn’t until after she underwent major surgery that J.B. learned she didn’t have cancer after all.

On Wednesday, J.B. filed a medical malpractice lawsuit in Ada County that accuses Cole of negligence and other harms. The Sun contacted Cole and his representatives by email and phone Thursday, but they could not be reached for comment.

What she didn’t know at the time of her cancer diagnosis was that Cole, a local pathologist, had just begun to make a name for himself based on a stance against COVID-19 vaccines, including false claims that they cause cancer.

There is no evidence that COVID-19 vaccines can raise, or lower, a person’s risk of cancer. There is evidence that they lower a person’s risk of severe illness, death and chronic health issues after a COVID-19 infection.

“I have seen a 10- to 20-fold increase of uterine cancer in the last six months in my laboratory,” Cole said at a meeting of America’s Frontline Doctors in San Antonio, Texas, about two weeks after he misdiagnosed J.B. with cancer of the uterine lining. “In the last six months. When did we start shots? January? How much solid-tumor cancer increase are we going to see over the next several years? Probably a lot.”

Cole became medical director of America’s Frontline Doctors — an organization that opposes COVID-19 vaccines — in July 2021, the month he gave that presentation, according to his resume. Cole has yet to publicly share data to back up his claim.

‘Internal trauma and a lot of pain’

After the diagnosis from Cole, J.B.’s nurse practitioner read it and immediately referred her to physicians who specialize in cancer and gynecologic cancers.

The surgeon removed her reproductive organs and surrounding abdominal tissue.

“I can’t even imagine receiving that kind of a diagnosis from someone, and then spending that period of time wondering — or knowing, or believing — that you had a very serious cancer,” said Eric Rossman of Rossman Law Group, one of two Boise law firms representing J.B. and her husband in the case. “And then just to find out, after that radical, extensive procedure, that there’s really no cancer whatsoever.”

According to the lawsuit, J.B. consulted with a St. Luke’s Health System gynecologic oncologist on July 20, 2021.

“At that time and relying on Dr. Cole’s pathology report, Dr. Perez discussed various treatment options with (J.B.) including chemotherapy, radiation therapy and surgery,” the lawsuit says.

She chose surgery and, on July 26, 2021, the doctor performed surgery to remove her uterus, remove both of her ovaries and fallopian tubes, and tissue and lymph nodes in her abdomen, the lawsuit says.

Three pathologists at the hospital examined the organs and tissue as they were removed and saw no cancer. The surgeon asked to get the biopsy tissue samples back from Cole’s laboratory; in early August, three of the hospital’s pathologists determined that biopsy, too, showed no sign of cancer, the lawsuit says.

J.B. and her husband were told by the surgeon’s office on Aug. 30, 2021, “that the final pathology on the tissue samples showed that (she) never had cancer,” the lawsuit says. “The erroneous diagnosis of cancer caused (her) to undergo an unnecessary surgery and the resultant pain and suffering from such surgery. The erroneous cancer diagnosis caused (the couple) substantial emotional trauma in believing that (she) had cancer and then in being told that she did not have cancer.”

It took J.B. at least six weeks to heal from the immediate physical impact of surgery, they said. Their bedroom is on the second floor of their home, so J.B. essentially lived on the second floor because it was too painful to walk up and down stairs, she said.

She had “internal trauma and a lot of pain,” her husband said.

There are lingering effects, the couple said. They have “good insurance” but still had large out-of-pocket costs from the surgery, her husband said. And because of the misdiagnosis, her medical records flagged her as a “cancer survivor.” That altered how doctors approached things like breast cancer screenings — ordering a biopsy to confirm that a benign spot on her mammogram wasn’t cancer, for example, her husband said.

The lawsuit accuses Cole of negligence, calling his conduct “reckless and outrageous … constituting an extreme deviation from reasonable standards of conduct” with “an understanding of, or disregard for, its likely consequences.”

The lawsuit also alleges Cole Diagnostics is liable for Cole’s actions.

It accuses Dr. Ryan Cole and Cole Diagnostics of negligent infliction of emotional distress — specifically, “severe mental suffering” that caused J.B. to have “severe and chronic insomnia, anxiety, fear of doctors and severe headaches” and her husband to have insomnia and anxiety.

J.B. and her husband seek damages and compensation. The amount would be determined in court, but it’s more than $25,000 for each of the three counts, according to the lawsuit. They also seek economic damages, such as payment for medical bills that resulted from the misdiagnosis.

Not just another case of a patient suing their doctor

Cole is a pathologist who specializes in skin diseases.

A presentation by Cole in spring 2021 inside the Idaho Capitol minimized the risks of COVID-19 and argued against public health guidance. The presentation racked up millions of views on social media and streaming video platforms.

After that, Cole rose to prominence in a movement that denied the safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines and other public health measures.

Cole also received a political appointment in mid-2021 to serve as the only physician on the board of Central District Health, Idaho’s largest regional public health department.

He owned and directed Cole Diagnostics laboratory in Garden City for about 20 years. But due to blowback from his public statements on COVID-19, Cole had to “sell it off,” he said in a January interview published to video streaming platform Rumble.

“So, at the end of the day, I just had to, you know, sell it off,” Cole said in the interview. “And I’m still doing the autopsy consultation. I still have access to, you know, some equipment that I held in reserve so I can still help people. But now it’s a shadow of what it was, you know, on a daily basis.”

Reporting by the Idaho Capital Sun last year revealed accusations by several of Cole’s former employees that he operated his laboratory in a “reckless” manner. The Sun reported that Cole Diagnostics pulled in large amounts of money from COVID-19 test revenues and federal and state grants associated with the pandemic.

The Washington Medical Commission in January charged Cole with violating professional standards when he treated COVID-19 patients through telehealth and spoke at events about COVID-19 and vaccines.

In a response filed last month, Cole denied all of the charges and argued that Washington’s medical licensing authorities were trying to stifle his First Amendment rights to freedom of speech.

Multiple patients were misdiagnosed by Cole: records and interviews

The Sun reported last year on complaints that Cole misdiagnosed two women with cancer or precancer of their reproductive organs. The Sun did not publish details that could be used to identify the women, to protect their medical privacy.

J.B. read that report by the Sun. She said to her husband, “The other patient of Dr. Cole that have a complaint, it sounds like me. It just has the age (as) 60-something, and during the time I was only 50.”

She assumed it was an error — that the woman in the complaint was her.

But it wasn’t an error. Instead, J.B. is the second woman to have undergone major surgery after getting erroneous test results from Cole, and the third woman the Sun has identified who received a misdiagnosis related to gynecologic cancer.

The patient whose medical care is described in Cole’s Washington Medical Commission complaint file is a 64-year-old woman whose description is not similar to J.B.

According to the records in Cole’s case file, that patient also had major surgery — removing reproductive organs and abdominal tissue — on July 19, 2021. Cole examined a biopsy taken from the woman’s body on June 30, 2021, and diagnosed her with endometrial cancer.

Idaho doctor who falsely links COVID-19 vaccine to cancer has misdiagnosed two patients

Pathologists from St. Luke’s Health System and Stanford University determined there was no evidence of cancer in the woman’s uterus or in the biopsy tissue that Cole had examined.

The Washington Medical Commission sent Cole a letter on March 30, 2022, asking him to respond to the allegation by April 20, 2022.

The commission’s records show Cole failed to respond by the deadline and didn’t respond to two emails, three phone calls and a certified letter.

Cole and his lawyer responded by email to the Washington Medical Commission on July 28, 2022.

The response made several arguments in defense of his diagnosis:

The health care provider gave him a small amount of tissue to examine from the biopsy and he “suggested that further pathology be conducted due to the size of the tissue sample.”His report “clearly stated that the clinician should read the microscopic description, wherein I suggested genetic testing.”While his own report recommended further evaluation, Cole criticized Stanford pathologists’ use of the words “may be” as a less definitive assessment. “They hedge diagnostically, which gives no meaning or direction to the clinician or patient,” he wrote.Pathology groups can “vary slightly in the criteria they use for determining the line between metaplasia (not cancer) and carcinoma (cancer).”Cole’s diagnosis was confirmed by a pathologist who worked for his laboratory. Even in hindsight, the tissue looked “highly suspicious for cancer” based on his examination, he said. “If this were my mother or my wife, I would have wanted them to have a hysterectomy,” he wrote.

Why no second opinion before invasive surgery?

The complaints about Cole’s diagnoses indicate that both patients had symptoms and abnormal test results that prompted their health care providers to order the biopsies Cole used to diagnose the patients.

Was surgery the most prudent way to treat these patients? Why didn’t anyone get a second opinion?

Rossman said that, in his client’s case, “if you look at this Cole Diagnostics original pathology report, there’s just really no ambiguity.”

There is nothing in the report that would ordinarily raise questions or doubts about the diagnosis, he said.

“Obviously, there were a lot of second, third, fourth and fifth opinions after the surgery, and they were unable to find any cancerous cells,” Rossman said. “But preoperatively? No. Because this was such an unequivocal diagnosis in Dr. Cole’s report. There really was no reason for (the surgeon) to question that.”

The cancer J.B. thought she had is an aggressive type of cancer. She didn’t want to wait to get treatment, she said. Health care providers worked to get her in for surgery as soon as possible, she said.

“Coming from a Third World country, you know, I didn’t expect to have a big mistake like this in U.S.,” said J.B., who immigrated to the U.S. from the Philippines. “We look up to the system and technology here. (To) have that kind of mistake, it’s so unbelievable. … It’s beyond my imagination. I thought everything here is precise, consistent and handled with care.”

Dr. Ryan Cole’s current status in Idaho

While he no longer owns Cole Diagnostics, Dr. Ryan Cole says he continues to practice as a pathologist. He is licensed in several states, including Idaho and Washington, and is certified by the American Board of Pathology.

Cole also is on the board of the Central District Health public health department. County commissioners appointed him to serve as the board’s licensed physician member until 2026.

The Idaho Board of Medicine has taken no disciplinary action on Cole’s medical license. It decided to close complaints about Cole before looking at his telehealth patients’ records, the Sun reported in December.

If the Washington Medical Commission decides to take disciplinary action on Cole’s license in that state, it is possible that Idaho’s medical licensing board could apply that action to Cole’s license here, as “reciprocal” discipline.

But it’s also possible that Idaho’s medical board could determine Washington’s rules don’t apply here. If that happens, the Idaho Board of Medicine’s determination likely won’t be made public, because state law shields from public view everything short of formal disciplinary action.

SUPPORT NEWS YOU TRUST.

DONATE

Idaho Capital Sun is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Idaho Capital Sun maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Christina Lords for questions: info@idahocapitalsun.com. Follow Idaho Capital Sun on Facebook and Twitter.

Related articles

This Trumpist threat proved itself a danger — now it’s forming again



By Alexander Lowie, Postdoctoral associate in Classical and Civic Education, University of Florida

Stewart Rhodes, the founder of the Oath Keepers, a far-right militia, announced in November 2025 that he will relaunch the group after it disbanded following his prison sentence in 2023.

Rhodes was sentenced to 18 years in prison for seditious conspiracy and other crimes committed during the U.S. Capitol riot on Jan. 6, 2021.

In January 2025, President Donald Trump granted clemency to the over 1,500 defendants convicted of crimes connected to the storming of the Capitol.

Trump did not pardon Rhodes — or some others found guilty of the most serious crimes on Jan. 6. He instead commuted Rhodes’ sentence to time served. Commutation only reduces the punishment for a crime, whereas a full pardon erases a conviction.

As a political anthropologist I study the Patriot movement, a collection of anti-government right-wing groups that include the Proud Boys, Oath Keepers and Moms for Liberty. I specialize in alt-right beliefs, and I have interviewed people active in groups that participated in the Capitol riot.

Rhodes’ plans to relaunch the Oath Keepers, largely composed of current and former military veterans and law enforcement officers, is important because it will serve as an outlet for those who have felt lost since his imprisonment. The group claimed it had more than 40,000 dues-paying members at the height of its membership during Barack Obama’s presidency. I believe that many of these people will return to the group, empowered by the lack of any substantial punishment resulting from the pardons for crimes committed on Jan. 6.

In my interviews, I’ve found that military veterans are treated as privileged members of the Patriot movement. They are honored for their service and military training. And that’s why I believe many former Oath Keepers will rejoin the group – they are considered integral members.

Their oaths to serving the Constitution and the people of the United States are treated as sacred, binding members to an ideology that leads to action. This action includes supporting people in conflicts against federal agencies, organizing citizen-led disaster relief efforts, and protesting election results like on Jan. 6. The members’ strength results from their shared oath and the reverence they feel toward keeping it.

Who are the Oath Keepers?

Rhodes joined the Army after high school and served for three years before being honorably discharged after a parachuting accident in 1986. He then attended the University of Nevada and later graduated from Yale Law School in 2004. He founded the Oath Keepers in 2009.

Oath Keepers takes its name from the U.S military Oath of Enlistment, which states:

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States …”

Informed by his law background, Rhodes places a particular emphasis on the part of the oath that states they will defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

He developed a legal theory that justifies ignoring what he refers to as “unlawful orders” after witnessing the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Following the natural disaster, local law enforcement was assigned the task of confiscating guns, many of which officers say were stolen or found in abandoned homes.

Rhodes was alarmed, believing that the Second Amendment rights of citizens were being violated. Because of this, he argued that people who had military or law enforcement backgrounds had a legal duty to refuse what the group considers unlawful orders, including any that violated constitutionally protected rights, such as the right to bear arms.

In the Oath Keepers’ philosophy, anyone who violates these rights are domestic enemies to the Constitution. And if you follow the orders, you’ve violated your oath.

Explaining the origin of the group on the right-wing website The Gateway Pundit in November 2025, Rhodes said: “We were attacked out of the gate, labeled anti-government, which is absurd because we’re defending the Constitution that established the federal government. We were labeled anti-government extremists, all kinds of nonsense because the elites want blind obedience in the police and military.”

Rebuilding and restructuring

In 2022, the nonprofit whistleblower site Distributed Denial of Secrets leaked more than 38,000 names on the Oath Keepers’ membership list.

The Anti-Defamation League estimated that nearly 400 were active law enforcement officers, and that more than 100 were serving in the military. Some of these members were investigated by their workplaces but never disciplined for their involvement with the group.

Some members who were not military or law enforcement did lose their jobs over their affiliation. But they held government-related positions, such as a Wisconsin alderman who resigned after he was identified as a member.

This breach of privacy, paired with the dissolution of the organization after Rhodes’ sentencing, will help shape the group going forward.

In his interview with The Gateway Pundit, where he announced the group’s relaunch, Rhodes said: “I want to make it clear, like I said, my goal would be to make it more cancel-proof than before. We’ll have resilient, redundant IT that makes it really difficult to take down … And I want to make sure I get – put people in charge and leadership everywhere in the country so that, you know, down the road, if I’m taken out again, that it can still live on under good leadership without me being there.”

There was a similar shift in organizational structure with the Proud Boys in 2018. That’s when their founder, Gavin McInnes, stepped away from the organization. His departure came after a group of Proud Boys members were involved in a fight with anti-fascists in New York.

Prosecutors wanted to try the group as a gang. McInnes, therefore, distanced himself to support their defense that they weren’t in a gang or criminal organization. Ultimately, two of the members were sentenced to four years in prison for attempted gang assault charges.

Some Proud Boys members have told me they have since focused on creating local chapters, with in-person recruitment, that communicate on private messaging apps. They aim to protect themselves from legal classification as a gang. It also makes it harder for investigators or activist journalists to monitor them.

This is referred to as a cell style of organization, which is popular with insurgency groups. These groups are organized to rebel against authority and overthrow government structures. The cell organizational style does not have a robust hierarchy but instead produces smaller groups. They all adhere to the same ideology but may not be directly associated.

They may have a leader, but it’s often acknowledged that they are merely a figurehead, not someone giving direct orders. For the Proud Boys, this would be former leader Enrique Tarrio. Proud Boys members I’ve spoken to have referred to him as a “mascot” and not their leader.

Looking ahead

So what does the Rhodes interview indicate about the future of Oath Keepers?

Members will continue supporting Trump while also recruiting more retired military and law enforcement officers. They will create an organizational structure designed to outlive Rhodes. And based on my interactions with the far-right, I believe it’s likely they will create an organizational structure similar to that of the cell style for organizing.

Beyond that, they are going to try to own their IT, which includes hosting their websites and also using trusted online revenue generators.

This will likely provide added security, protecting their membership rolls while making it more difficult for law enforcement agencies to investigate them in the future.

Trump’s ‘High-Fear’ World

Not long after I first moved to Washington, D.C. more than 25 years ago, I was at a foreign policy...

Sean McDermott: “You Learn From Experience“ | Buffalo Bills

Head Coach Sean McDermott addressed the media...