The lawsuit accuses drug manufacturer Novo Nordisk of failing to warn patients of the possible association between the popular drug and an eye condition called NAION.
A Maryland man who took Ozempic and then became legally blind is suing the drug’s manufacturer, arguing it had an obligation to warn patients that loss of sight could be a possible side effect.
Todd Engel, 62, was prescribed Ozempic in 2023 to manage his Type 2 diabetes. The lawsuit said about four months later, Engel was diagnosed with nonarteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy, or NAION, a condition in which a loss of blood flow to the optic nerve causes sudden and irreversible vision loss.
NAION occurs in up to about 10 out of every 100,000 people over age 50, according to the American Academy of Ophthalmology.
Umm, this is fucking Moron level shit. Every person who understands anything about diabeetus, knows that low glucose can lead to blindness. Just because he was prescribed Ozempic doesn’t mean he can just stop monitoring his blood glucose levels, drugs like Ozempic help your body process sugars super efficiently, so if you’re feeling woozy it’s time to eat and add some sugars. Even without Ozempic you can go blind over this.
I’m so glad you said this because I came to say the same thing.
“Oh, the 62-year old man with diabetes lost vision? That’s literally never happened to anyone ever.”
That happens to people on insulin, off insulin, on other sugar controlling drugs! This is diabetes!
The blindness from diabetes is a completely different one than the one from Ozempic. There are many ways to lose your eye sight. Diabetes makes your retina fail. Semaglutides causes issues with the blood flow to the eye nerves.
How do doctors even tell that it wasn’t just from masturbating too much?
Double blind study.
1 day blinding stew
That’s why I don’t take Ozempic, even though my diabetes specialist offered to prescribe it.
The scientific article that drew a connection between Semaglutide and NAION dates from July 2024, so the prescription handed to the plaintiff clearly predates scientific public knowledge. The key issue will probably be to establish proof that Novo Nordisk knew or had reasons to suspect this causality.
Uggh, that’ll be a tough one to prove (though I’m sure they knew). Pharma is really good at hiding info from themselves.
Yes to the first and the last, but I’m not sure they actually knew. It is below 10 cases in 100k uses, and the link is purely statistical at the moment, so there is still no causality established.
