A disturbing allegation involving a young Nigerian man who says he discovered that his left kidney was missing has attracted widespread attention after social media activist Martins Vincent Otse, popularly known as VeryDarkMan (VDM), became involved in the case.
The story has generated serious concerns about patient safety, informed consent and possible organ trafficking. However, despite the strong reactions surrounding the case, important details remain under investigation. At the time of writing, there is not enough independently verified evidence to conclude exactly how, when or by whom the man’s kidney was removed.
Here is what is currently known.
The Young Man Approaches VeryDarkMan
The man at the centre of the case has been identified in media reports as Ezekiel Samuel, reportedly from Jaba Local Government Area of Kaduna State, Nigeria.
According to reports based on VeryDarkMan’s account, Samuel approached VDM on August 18, 2026, seeking assistance over his claim that one of his kidneys had been removed without his knowledge or consent (Hetty’s Media, 2026).
The allegation was serious, but VDM reportedly did not immediately accept it as fact. Instead, medical examinations were arranged to determine whether Samuel actually had both kidneys.
This distinction is important. At that stage, Samuel’s statement was an allegation. Establishing that a kidney was absent required medical evidence, while determining what had happened to it would require a much broader investigation.
Medical Examinations Reportedly Find the Left Kidney Absent
According to current reports, Samuel underwent medical examinations at Nisa Premier Hospital in Abuja.
Further checks were reportedly conducted at the Federal Medical Centre (FMC), Jabi, Abuja.
Media reports citing VeryDarkMan state that the examinations indicated that Samuel’s left kidney was absent (Hetty’s Media, 2026; NewsclickNG, 2026).
The reported medical findings gave the case considerably more weight because the question was no longer simply whether Samuel’s allegation that he had only one kidney could be dismissed.
However, there is an important limitation.
Finding that a kidney is absent does not, by itself, prove who removed it, when it was removed, where it was removed or under what circumstances it became absent.
Those are separate questions that require medical records, surgical history and investigative evidence.
How Did the Kidney Become Missing?
This remains the central unanswered question.
Samuel reportedly claimed that his kidney had been removed without his consent following a hospital visit. However, publicly available reporting reviewed for this article has not independently established the complete medical circumstances surrounding the alleged procedure.
For example, an investigation would need to determine Samuel’s previous medical history, the treatment he originally sought, whether he underwent surgery, what procedure was documented, what consent was obtained and whether earlier medical examinations showed that both kidneys were present.
Investigators would also need to examine hospital records and interview medical personnel and other people who were with Samuel.
Without such evidence, it would be premature to identify a particular doctor or medical institution as responsible for unlawfully removing his kidney.
Investigation Reportedly Turns Toward a Friend
The story subsequently took another unexpected turn.
In a later account attributed to VeryDarkMan, attention reportedly shifted toward a friend who was said to have accompanied or taken Samuel to the hospital.
VeryDarkMan claimed that information gathered during his investigation suggested the friend may have played a role in getting Samuel to the hospital where the alleged removal occurred.
According to a report published by Nollywood Times, VDM said police became involved and the friend was subsequently arrested (Kutu, 2026).
This claim should still be treated cautiously. An arrest or allegation does not establish criminal guilt, and publicly available reporting reviewed for this article does not provide a final police investigation, criminal charge or court judgment establishing responsibility for the alleged removal.
Friend Allegedly Sold His Own Kidney for ₦7 Million
Another significant allegation emerged from VDM’s later account.
VeryDarkMan claimed that after the friend was apprehended, it was discovered that the friend was also missing a kidney.
VDM further alleged that the friend had previously sold his kidney for ₦7 million (Kutu, 2026).
The allegation immediately raised a larger question: could Samuel’s case be connected to an illegal kidney trade?
VeryDarkMan went further, claiming that information he had received suggested other people living in the same area may also have sold their kidneys.
These are extremely serious allegations.
At present, however, the claims about the ₦7 million kidney sale and a potentially wider network should not be presented as independently proven facts. They are allegations attributed to VeryDarkMan and require confirmation through police investigations, medical documentation and, where applicable, court proceedings.
Does This Prove Organ Harvesting?
No. Not yet.
The information currently available raises legitimate and serious questions, but there is an important difference between evidence that a person is missing a kidney and evidence proving illegal organ harvesting.
The reported medical examinations appear to support the claim that Samuel’s left kidney is absent. What they do not establish on their own is the chain of events that caused its absence.
An investigation would need to establish, among other things:
- whether Samuel previously had two kidneys;
- when the left kidney became absent;
- what medical procedure Samuel underwent;
- where any operation was performed;
- who participated in the procedure;
- whether Samuel provided legally valid informed consent;
- whether money or another benefit changed hands;
- whether his friend had any involvement; and
- whether other individuals were connected to an organised kidney trade.
Until authorities establish those facts, describing the matter as a confirmed case of illegal organ harvesting would go beyond the available evidence.
What Nigerian Law Says About Organ Removal
Nigeria’s National Health Act 2014 contains provisions governing the removal and transplantation of human tissue, blood, blood products and gametes.
Under Section 48 of the Act, a person generally may not remove tissue from a living person for transplantation without the required informed consent and other legal requirements (Federal Republic of Nigeria, 2014).
The Act also regulates payment connected with the acquisition or supply of human tissue. Section 53 provides restrictions relating to receiving financial or other rewards for tissue, subject to the specific provisions of the law (Federal Republic of Nigeria, 2014).
Therefore, if an investigation ultimately establishes that a person’s kidney was deliberately removed without valid consent or was unlawfully traded, the matter could have serious legal consequences.
That determination, however, belongs to the appropriate investigative and judicial authorities rather than social media.
Why Medical Records Will Be Critical
One of the most important pieces of evidence in this case will be Samuel’s medical history.
Investigators will need to establish whether there are previous ultrasound scans, CT scans or other medical records showing that he originally had two kidneys.
The records from the medical facility where the disputed treatment allegedly occurred will also be important.
They could help answer basic questions such as what condition Samuel was treated for, whether surgery was performed, who performed it, what medications or anaesthesia were administered, how long he remained at the facility and what consent documentation exists.
If surgery was performed, medical and surgical records could potentially provide important evidence about what occurred.
Independent medical specialists may also be required to examine Samuel and review the available scans and records.
Public Anger Should Not Replace an Investigation
The allegations have understandably generated anger and concern online.
The idea that someone could enter a medical facility and later discover that an organ was missing is frightening. Nevertheless, public outrage should not be allowed to substitute for evidence.
There is currently a danger of social-media discussion moving faster than the investigation.
Claims circulating online that particular individuals or medical institutions definitely “stole” Samuel’s kidney should therefore be treated cautiously unless supported by verified investigative findings.
The same caution applies to claims of a wider kidney-selling operation.
If authorities eventually uncover evidence of an organised network, it would be a major criminal and public-health matter. Until then, it remains an allegation requiring investigation.
What Has Been Established and What Has Not?
Based on publicly available reporting reviewed as of August 24, 2026, the most responsible summary of the case is this:
Reported with supporting accounts: A young man identified as Ezekiel Samuel approached VeryDarkMan over a missing-kidney allegation. Medical examinations were reportedly conducted at Nisa Premier Hospital and FMC Jabi, and reports citing VDM say the examinations showed that Samuel’s left kidney was absent (Hetty’s Media, 2026; NewsclickNG, 2026).
Alleged but not independently established: Samuel says the kidney was removed without his knowledge or consent. VeryDarkMan has alleged that Samuel’s friend was connected to the circumstances that took him to the hospital. VDM has also claimed that the friend sold his own kidney for ₦7 million and that other people in the area may have sold kidneys (Kutu, 2026).
Not yet established in the sources reviewed: Who removed Samuel’s kidney, when exactly it was removed, where the alleged removal occurred, whether a specific doctor committed an offence, whether Samuel’s friend participated in an illegal removal, or whether an organised organ-trafficking network was responsible.
Those distinctions matter because allegations involving medical professionals, hospitals and criminal activity can have serious consequences for everyone involved.
The Bigger Issue: Informed Consent and Patient Safety
Whatever the final investigation establishes, Samuel’s story highlights the importance of informed consent and transparent medical care.
Patients should understand the procedures being performed on them, including the purpose, risks and alternatives where applicable. Medical facilities also have a responsibility to maintain accurate records that can establish what treatment was provided.
Cases involving suspected organ trafficking deserve particularly careful investigation because the consequences can be permanent.
A person can live with one healthy kidney, but losing a kidney is not a minor event. Anyone who has undergone nephrectomy or has only one functioning kidney may require appropriate medical follow-up depending on their individual circumstances.
What Happens Next?
The most important development now would be a transparent investigation by the appropriate Nigerian authorities.
Medical documentation could establish what happened clinically. Police investigation could establish whether any criminal conduct occurred. If sufficient evidence of criminal wrongdoing is found, prosecutors and ultimately the courts would determine responsibility.
Until those processes produce reliable evidence, Samuel’s case should be reported for what it currently is: a serious allegation involving a young man whose left kidney has reportedly been found absent, with major questions about how it happened still unanswered.
The seriousness of the allegation makes accuracy especially important.
Samuel deserves a proper investigation into what happened to him. Medical professionals or institutions accused in connection with the case also deserve to have responsibility determined through evidence rather than online speculation.
The truth will depend not on how shocking the story sounds, but on what the medical records and investigation ultimately establish.
Disclaimer
This article is based on publicly available information and media reports available as of August 24, 2026. Several important aspects of the case remain allegations and have not been established by a final police investigation or court judgment in the sources reviewed. References to alleged criminal conduct should therefore not be interpreted as findings of guilt against any individual, hospital or organisation. This article is intended for news and public-information purposes and should not be considered legal or medical advice.
References
Federal Republic of Nigeria. (2014). National Health Act, 2014. Federal Republic of Nigeria.
Hetty’s Media. (2026, August 23). VeryDarkMan intervenes as young man alleges unauthorised kidney removal after hospital visit. https://www.hettysmedia.com/verydarkman-intervenes-as-young-man-alleges-unauthorised-kidney-removal-after-hospital-visit/
Kutu, T. (2026, August 23). Young man’s kidney removed after friend lured him to hospital—VeryDarkMan. Nollywood Times. https://www.nollywoodtimes.com/2026/08/young-mans-kidney-removed-after-friend.html
NewsclickNG. (2026, August 22). [Trending video] Man cries out over alleged unauthorised kidney removal at Abuja hospital, netizens react. https://newsclickng.com/entertainment/trending-video-man-cries-out-over-alleged-unauthorised-kidney-removal-at-abuja-hospital-netizens-react/
Orijo Reporter. (2026, August 22). Video: Young man claims doctor removed his kidney without consent. https://orijoreporter.com/video-young-man-claims-doctor-removed-his-kidney-without-consent/
