GLP-1 Litigation: BMJ Spotlights NAION Eye-Damage Suits as MDL-3094 Daubert Ruling Remains Unissued
New this week — the vision-loss docket gets mainstream medical-press attention. The BMJ (published Oct. 9, 2026) reports: "Dozens of people claiming to have sustained eye damage from using GLP-1 medications are suing Eli Lilly and Novo Nordisk, the makers of the blockbuster drugs." The condition at the center of the suits is non-arteritic anterior ischaemic optic neuropathy (NAION) — "sometimes described as a 'stroke' of the optic nerve" and the most common acute optic neuropathy in people over 50. Baseline incidence is just 2–10 people per 100,000 per year, there is no treatment, and "several observational studies have linked GLP-1s to NAION." Obesity-medicine physician Kevin Gendreau describes the injury: "Blood flow to the nerve drops, causing sudden, painless (often permanent) vision loss in one eye, often noticed on waking."
MDL-3094 (GI injuries, E.D. Pa.) — Daubert ruling still pending. Judge Karen Marston held the Rule 702 general-causation evidentiary hearing Sept. 14–18, 2026 (4,022+ pending actions). Mass-tort and settlement trackers checked through this cycle (Oct. 12) report no ruling has issued — the most recent confirmed status was a scheduling order, with no opinion posted as of end-September. The ruling is the single gating event: exclusion deflates the docket; admission sets up bellwethers and settlement scenarios for Novo and Lilly.
Novo v. Lilly false-advertising injunction — still undecided. As of the last cycle's check (Oct. 5) Judge had not ruled on Novo's preliminary-injunction motion to block Lilly's comparative Zepbound/Mounjaro ads, and nothing new surfaced this week. The motion was filed Aug. 17, 2026.
Investor framing: the NAION docket runs separately from the GI-injury MDL-3094 but shares the same judge and defendants — a second front that raises aggregate settlement tail-risk if causation evidence survives. Key asymmetry: NAION's very low baseline incidence makes per-case stakes high but epidemiology contested; watch whether plaintiffs' NAION experts get consolidated into the same Daubert track. Next catalysts: the MDL-3094 Daubert opinion (expected imminently, now ~4 weeks post-hearing) and any bellwether scheduling.