“They Said He Had an Eye Stroke”: What That Means, and Which Kind Is in the Lawsuit

Marin & MurphySuper Lawyers® 2014–2024(888) 348-2735

Ozempic (GLP-1) Lawsuit — Free Case Review

Sudden Vision Loss Deserves Answers

If NAION was diagnosed during or after brand-name GLP-1 use and some vision loss is permanent, you may qualify — spouses and family welcome to call.

No Ozempic or other GLP-1 lawsuit has been settled, and no court or jury has found that these medications caused anyone's injury — the litigation is ongoing, with major expert-evidence rulings still ahead. Whether any individual has a claim depends on their own medical records and the law of their state.

Did this happen to you — or someone you love?

Start your free case reviewTell us anyway

Answered 24/7 · Free & confidential · No fee unless there is a recovery. Court costs and litigation expenses are advanced by counsel and repaid from the recovery. You are not responsible for court costs or litigation expenses if there is no recovery, unless a court directs otherwise. The attorney's fee is a percentage of the gross recovery, calculated before expenses are deducted.

(888) 348-2735

Partners

Matthew T. Marin & Stefanie A. Murphy

Super Lawyers® honorees · American Association for Justice members

Ozempic inquiries get a personal review — and an honest answer either way, free and without obligation.

No Ozempic or other GLP-1 lawsuit has been settled, and no court or jury has found that these medications caused anyone's injury — the litigation is ongoing, with major expert-evidence rulings still ahead. Whether any individual has a claim depends on their own medical records and the law of their state. Do not stop, start, or change any prescribed medication because of anything on this page. Those decisions belong with your prescriber. Attorney Advertising.

“Eye stroke” is an everyday term, not a single diagnosis. It covers several different injuries caused by interrupted blood flow in or behind the eye — and only one of them, NAION, is part of the GLP-1 litigation. NAION affects the optic nerve. Retinal artery and vein occlusions affect the retina, and are not currently included. Knowing which one is written in the medical records is the single most useful thing you can find out before making a call.

Reports submitted to FDA are not verified and do not establish causation; they are voluntary, can duplicate one another, and rise and fall with prescribing volume and news coverage.

Where the phrase comes from

Doctors rarely write “eye stroke” in a chart, but they often say it out loud, because it explains the idea quickly: a blockage of blood flow, arriving suddenly, causing permanent damage — the same mechanism as a stroke, in a different place. News coverage uses it for the same reason.

The difficulty comes later. Families go home with the phrase “eye stroke” and no clear sense of which structure was injured. Months later, when it matters, nobody is certain what was actually diagnosed.

The three things “eye stroke” usually means

• NAION — non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy. The blood supply to the front of the optic nerve is interrupted. Sudden, painless, one eye, typically noticed on waking, often taking the lower half of the visual field. This is the injury in the GLP-1 litigation.
• Retinal artery occlusion (CRAO or BRAO). An artery supplying the retina is blocked. Also sudden and painless, but a different structure, and it is treated as a stroke-equivalent requiring urgent workup for its source.
• Retinal vein occlusion (CRVO or BRVO). A vein draining the retina is blocked, causing swelling and bleeding. Vision loss is often more gradual or fluctuating.

All three are sometimes called an eye stroke. Only the first is part of MDL 3163.

If it was a retinal occlusion rather than NAION

Then, as things currently stand, it is not part of this litigation, and we would rather tell you that plainly than take your details and let you wonder for a month.

This is not a technicality we invented. These proceedings are defined by injury type, and the panel that organizes them has already declined to widen the GLP-1 litigation to other conditions. “Any injury while taking a GLP-1 is part of the lawsuit” is simply not how it works, and firms that imply otherwise are collecting names rather than answering the question.

Two things are still worth doing. Confirm what the records actually say, because “eye stroke” conversations and written diagnoses often diverge. And if a retinal occlusion has been formally linked to a medication in your own care, that is a matter for a treating physician and, if you want one, an individual consultation — it is just not this proceeding.

How to find out which one it was

The answer is in the ophthalmology or neuro-ophthalmology notes, not in memory. Useful things to look for:

• The words optic neuropathy, ischemic optic neuropathy, NAION, or optic disc edema — these point to the optic nerve.
• The words retinal artery occlusion, retinal vein occlusion, CRAO, CRVO, BRAO or BRVO — these point to the retina.
• Which specialist made the call. A neuro-ophthalmologist being involved often points toward the optic nerve.
• Visual field testing results, and whether giant cell arteritis was ruled out with blood tests — both are standard in a NAION workup.

You are entitled to these records. If you are helping a family member, they can request them, or authorize you to.

Why a medication is part of this at all

In June 2025 the European Medicines Agency’s safety committee concluded that NAION is a “very rare” side effect of semaglutide — up to 1 in 10,000 people — and required it to be listed in the European product information, citing roughly a two-fold increase in risk and about one additional case per 10,000 person-years. Regulators in the UK and Australia followed. As of September 23, 2026, verified against the FDA-posted prescribing information (Ozempic PI, NDA 209637 s038, revision 05/2026), the US label still carries no NAION warning. Federal cases were consolidated as MDL 3163 in December 2025; 247 were pending as of October 1, 2026. The fuller picture, including the studies on both sides, is here.

Who may qualify today

• Use of brand-name Ozempic, Wegovy, Rybelsus, Trulicity, Mounjaro, or Zepbound — not compounded or generic versions.
• An actual NAION diagnosis — specifically NAION, rather than a retinal artery or vein occlusion.
• Diagnosed while taking the medication or after stopping it.
• Some degree of permanent vision impairment.
• Not already represented by another lawyer for this issue.
• No age limit, no hospital requirement, no diagnosis-date cutoff on this track.
• Not sure which diagnosis was made? That is extremely common. We can help you work out what the records say before anything else happens.

You are not suing the doctors

This is a claim against the companies that made and labeled the medication — Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly. It is not a claim against the emergency department, the optometrist, or the specialist who made the diagnosis. Their records are what a claim is built on.

Common questions

Related vision-loss topics: sudden vision loss in one eye, risk to the other eye, NAION vision-loss claims, and the US vs. EU warning-label gap.