For all their benefits, and there are many including weight loss and possible addiction treatment, GLP-1 drugs like Ozempic can do great damage to a patient’s health. Ozempic has been linked to stomach paralysis (or gastroparesis), NAION (an incurable form of blindness), pancreatitis, and thyroid tumors. Patients must carefully weigh the promise and perils of these drugs before they embark on a course of treatment.
Recent New York Times reporting explores several medical research studies that shed some light on how these drugs affect the brain’s eating-control systems. What researchers found was not what they expected. The result may ultimately be medications that are safer, but equally or more effective than GLP-1s.
Ozempic lawsuits – progress to date
All GLP-1 lawsuits, including those specific to Ozempic injuries, have been consolidated as part of a multidistrict litigation (MDL) in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, where they are being overseen by U.S. District Judge Karen Marston. As of April 1, 2025, there were 1,685 active lawsuits pending against Novo Nordisk and other pharmaceutical companies. These relate to a wide variety of dangerous side effects, including, but not limited to gastroparesis.
The process of discovery, of which the May 14 hearing is a part, will continue through at least mid-October. Only after these preliminary steps are complete, will bellwether trials begin. People who have been injured still have a long wait before they can expect to see any financial recovery.
In the meantime, however, medical researchers are exploring the question of what makes us eat and why some chronically overeat even when they have no need for further calories.
Yes, hunger really is in your head
The eating-control system appears to be buried in a small cluster of newly-discovered neurons in the brain stem. This part of the brain controls basic functions like heart rate and breathing. Scientists now ask whether medications that target only this tiny subset of neurons could bring the benefits of GLP-1 drugs without the wider damage that drugs like Ozempic appear to cause to the human body.
Near-brainless mice (apologies to the squeamish)
The decades-old study, on which more recent research is built, involved mice whose brains had been largely destroyed. With nothing left but a brain stem, the mice could not see, smell or remember. Dr. Harvey Grill, who conducted the study at the University of Pennsylvania, dripped food into the mouths of the rodents. When they reached a stopping point, they would allow the food to run out of their mouths.
Later studies have shown that it is not the quantity or taste of food to which the brain responds. It is the calories. (This is why drinking a large glass of water before a meal appears not to affect how much we eat.) But how do these neurons calculate calories and compare that number to the body’s needs?
Three steps to the shutoff switch
The brain appears to receive information about calories in three waves:
-
The first step occurs when the lab animal sees the food. The sight of food spurs neurons to anticipate whether a lot of calories will be packed into the food. The neurons respond more strongly to high-calorie foods like peanut butter.
-
When the animal tastes the food the neurons calculate the caloric density again from signals sent from the mouth to the brainstem.
-
Finally, when the food makes its way to the gut, a new set of signals to the brain lets the neurons again ascertain the caloric content.
When the brain determines that enough calories were consumed, neurons send a signal to stop eating. Scientists still do not fully understand how the brain tracks the caloric content of each bite of food.
READ MORE OZEMPIC AND MOUNJARO LEGAL NEWS
Next on the horizon is the question of why the “shutoff switch” appears not to work well in some people. Is it that final signal that fails, or does the disruption occur at some other point or points in the feedback loop?
Law and medicine working together
So, what do lawsuits and research scientists have in common? Not a lot, at first glance. In a sense, the law is backward looking. It strives to provide some resource – money mostly – to people who have already been hurt. Ideally, people can use this to replace lost income, pay for medical care and provide for their families. Medicine looks forward to prevent harm in the first place or to treat the harm that has happened.
In fact, though, there is a good deal of overlap. Successful litigation can prompt marketers and manufacturers to warn patients of dangers or pursue safer drugs. Medicine can provide safer treatments. It will take both to manage the future of treatment for diabetes and obesity.
Source link
