$68 per qualified lead. That’s what Ozempic GI claims cost right now on the low end. By the time bellwethers hit in late 2026, that number won’t exist.
Two separate MDLs. Over 3,400 pending cases. A plaintiff pool of 33 million Americans.
CPAs haven’t caught up to the actual retainer values yet. This is the growth-stage tort with the widest gap between lead cost and case value in the market.
Two MDLs, Two Funnels
Most torts consolidate into one MDL. Ozempic has two.
MDL 3094 covers gastrointestinal injuries. Gastroparesis, gallbladder disease, bowel obstruction, pancreatitis. It’s in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania with 3,363+ pending cases.
Gastroparesis claims make up roughly 75% of the case volume.
MDL 3163 covers NAION, a form of vision loss. It’s newer with 29+ federal cases, but the injury severity is extreme. Permanent vision impairment isn’t something a jury shrugs at.
Why does this matter for your intake? Two entirely different qualification paths. Different medical criteria, different case values, different strategies.
The Lead Economics
Here’s where it gets interesting.
GI claims sit at the lower end. The qualification bar isn’t steep: a gastroparesis diagnosis, brand-name GLP-1 use, and documentation. Wide funnel.
NAION claims cost more to acquire but the retainer values run dramatically higher. Permanent vision loss cases could settle for $500,000 to $2 million or more. The MOIC on a $300 lead converting to a $1M case isn’t math you need a calculator for.
What’s the retainer value on a gastroparesis case? Projections range from $100,000 to $500,000 depending on severity. Surgery cases command the premium tier.
The firms making money right now aren’t chasing volume. They’re qualifying hard on injury severity and running separate funnels for GI versus NAION.
Who’s Spending
A third of the top Ozempic advertisers aren’t law firms. They’re lead generators.
That’s the pattern across every growth-stage tort. Lead gen companies move in early, build the intake infrastructure, and sell cases back to firms at markup. Some add value. Most add a middleman tax.
Social channels dominate the current mix at about 40%. The GLP-1 user base skews younger and more digitally active than your typical mass tort plaintiff pool.
Broadcast still pulls 30%. It works for the older gastroparesis demographic that isn’t scrolling through lawsuit ads on Instagram.
CTV is at 12% and climbing. This is the channel gap.
Most firms haven’t realized the same person who took Ozempic for weight loss streams four hours of content per night. CTV’s household-level targeting reaches GLP-1 users without the social media auction.
Search captures the intent layer at 18%. “Ozempic lawsuit” keywords still convert, but CPCs climb every month.
The Science That Built the Case
Two studies changed everything.
A JAMA Ophthalmology study on semaglutide and NAION risk found semaglutide users with type 2 diabetes had a 4.28x increased risk of NAION. For overweight and obese patients without diabetes, the risk jumped to 7.64x.
Those aren’t marginal numbers. That’s the kind of relative risk that makes bellwether juries pay attention.
On the GI side, thousands of FDA adverse event reports documented gastroparesis, bowel obstruction, and gallbladder disease. Novo Nordisk spent $500 million on DTC advertising in the first nine months of 2025 alone.
The argument that they knew the risks and pushed the drug anyway isn’t hard to make.
Qualification Criteria
For NAION claims, the bar is specific. Brand-name GLP-1 medication only. No generics, no compounded versions.
Ozempic, Wegovy, Rybelsus, Trulicity, Mounjaro, or Zepbound. The diagnosis must’ve occurred while actively taking the drug. Permanent vision impairment is required.
GI claims have a broader qualification path but still require documentation. Gastroparesis diagnosis, evidence of GLP-1 use, and medical records linking the timeline.
Firms running both funnels need separate intake scripts. A NAION screener asking about gastroparesis wastes everyone’s time.
The Timing Play
Where is this tort in its lifecycle? Growth. Not peak.
Bellwether trials for MDL 3094 are expected in late 2026 to early 2027. That’s when CPAs explode.
Every mass tort follows the same pattern: once bellwethers are scheduled and verdicts drop, every firm in America starts advertising.
Right now, 3,400 cases are pending. By bellwether, that number could hit 15,000 or more.
The plaintiff pool is enormous. Between 15 and 33 million Americans have used GLP-1 medications. Not all of them have injuries. But enough do.
What does a $68 lead cost when 50 firms are bidding instead of 15? History says it triples. Minimum.
The Play
If you’re running Ozempic intake today, three things matter.
First, split your funnels. GI and NAION are different cases, different values, different plaintiffs. One intake form for both is leaving money on the table.
Second, lock in CTV now. Social CPAs will double by Q3. CTV lets you reach GLP-1 users at household level before the auction crowds.
Third, qualify harder. Volume without qualification is what lead gen companies sell. Firms that screen for injury severity, documented records, and brand-name drug use build portfolios worth $100M+ at settlement.
The window on sub-$100 Ozempic leads is closing. Twelve months from now, every mass tort advertiser in the country will be chasing this tort. The firms that started today will own the best cases.
References
- JPML Transfer Order, In Re: Ozempic (Semaglutide) Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 3094
- Hathaway JT et al. Risk of Nonarteritic Anterior Ischemic Optic Neuropathy in Patients Prescribed Semaglutide. JAMA Ophthalmology, 2024
- Whitehardt Mass Tort Report: Hot Tort Rankings and Lead Economics, Q1 2026
- Reuters. Novo Nordisk faces thousands of lawsuits over Ozempic side effects, 2025
- FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) data on GLP-1 receptor agonists