In recent years, a rapidly growing number of lawsuits have been filed in the United States involving popular GLP-1 medications like Ozempic, Wegovy, Rybelsus, Mounjaro, Trulicity, and Zepbound. These drugs — originally developed to help people with type 2 diabetes manage their blood sugar — have also become widely used for weight loss and appetite control. While many patients have seen benefits from these medications, thousands of users claim they experienced severe and unexpected side effects that were not adequately disclosed by the manufacturers, leading to large-scale product liability litigation.

Most of the current legal actions are focused on the allegation that the drug makers, including Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly, failed to properly warn patients and healthcare professionals about risks beyond what was included in the product labels. Plaintiffs in these cases claim that GLP-1 drugs caused serious gastrointestinal injuries, such as gastroparesis (a condition in which the stomach cannot empty properly), intestinal obstruction, and ileus, which can lead to persistent nausea, vomiting, malnutrition, dehydration, and emergency medical care. These gastrointestinal effects stem from how GLP-1 medications slow gastric emptying, a known mechanism of action that plaintiffs argue was not clearly communicated as a potential danger in real-world use.

In addition to these digestive injuries, a separate group of lawsuits has emerged alleging that GLP-1 drugs can lead to vision loss, specifically a rare condition called non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy (NAION). Plaintiffs assert that this condition — which can result in sudden, often permanent partial blindness — was not adequately disclosed, even as research and regulatory reviews raised concerns about its potential risk. Because these vision-loss claims involve different medical issues and evidence from the gastrointestinal lawsuits, they have been centralised in a separate multidistrict litigation (MDL) in federal court, although the same judge is overseeing both proceedings.

The lawsuits brought under these MDLs are part of product liability litigation, which generally alleges that manufacturers failed to provide sufficient warnings or misrepresented the safety profile of their drugs. Plaintiffs are seeking compensation for medical expenses, pain and suffering, lost income, and diminished quality of life due to injuries they attribute to long-term use of GLP-1 medications. As of early 2026, thousands of cases remain pending, and no global settlement has been announced, meaning these issues could be years from resolution through trials or negotiated settlements.

Pharmaceutical companies involved in the litigation maintain that GLP-1 drugs like Ozempic are safe when used as directed and that known side effects were included in product labeling. They also argue that some conditions alleged by plaintiffs can be associated with underlying health issues such as diabetes itself, making causation complex and contested in court. Still, plaintiffs’ attorneys continue to challenge these positions, pushing for stronger warnings and accountability for injuries suffered. 

Because the lawsuits involve complex medical and scientific evidence, pretrial proceedings have included detailed reviews of medical studies, expert testimony on whether the drugs caused specific injuries, and regulatory context about when and how warnings were updated. These early stages are critical in shaping how many cases proceed to trial and what types of evidence will be admissible.

As the litigation progresses, it is likely to have broader implications for how widely prescribed GLP-1 therapies are labeled, monitored, and discussed between doctors and patients, especially as these medications remain among the most commonly used treatments for diabetes and weight management in the U.S.