Back in September, 2022, I wrote about the case of Noah Cantabrana, who was diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder ASD when he was two years and nine months old.
As a baby and toddler, Noah consumed high amounts of baby foods that were manufactured by the following:
Nurture, Inc. (Happy Family Organics and HappyBABY) of New York
Beech-Nut Nutrition Company of New York
Hain Celestial Group, Inc. (Earth’s Best Organic) of New York
Gerber Products Company of Michigan
Plum PBC (Plum Organics) of California
Walmart, Inc. (Parent’s Choice) of Arkansas
Sprout Foods, Inc. of New Jersey
Noah's parents initiated legal action, alleging that their son's consumption of high quantities of baby foods led to a diagnosis of ASD and ADHD.
Attorneys representing the Cantabrana family assert that young children exposed to toxic metals through baby food products face an increased risk of neurodevelopmental disorders. This heightened risk stems from the fact that the brains of infants and toddlers are still in the crucial stages of development.
Babies and toddlers are particularly vulnerable to metal exposure due to their higher food intake relative to their body weight and their increased susceptibility to metal absorption, which can be 40% to 90% greater than that of adults. Moreover, their bodies have less developed mechanisms for metabolizing and eliminating heavy metals, coupled with weaker detoxification and immune systems compared to adults.
Research indicates that even at low levels, exposure to heavy metals can result in severe and irreversible neurological damage, potentially leading to conditions such as autism and ADHD. A notable study conducted by the National Institutes of Health, which focused on twins to mitigate genetic influences, highlighted the role of early-life exposure to heavy metals like lead in influencing the risk of autism spectrum disorder.
In September 2021, a lawsuit was filed on behalf of Noah to address these concerns and seek appropriate legal recourse.
In 2022, a judge in the Los Angeles Superior Court permitted Noah's case to proceed, ruling that the opinions of the plaintiff's experts, asserting that heavy metals could be a significant factor in causing ASD and ADHD, were admissible.
Subsequently, in September 2023, another judge acknowledged that the opinions of Noah's experts, linking exposure to heavy metals to autism and ADHD, were grounded in solid scientific evidence. However, the case was dismissed due to a technicality. During a hearing, this judge rejected crucial expert witness testimony regarding the calculation of the dose of heavy metals ingested through baby food, thereby preventing Noah's case from reaching a jury.
Now, it seems that the multinational corporations associated with brands such as Beech-Nut, Hain Celestial (Earth’s Best), and Sprout Organics, as well as retailers like Walmart (Parent’s Choice), Nurture (Happy Family), and Plum Organics, will seek to compel Noah Cantabrana, a fourth-grader from Temecula, Calif., to pay over half a million dollars following the dismissal of his lawsuit against these companies.
You read it right.
“Six of the largest baby food manufacturers in the world, who claim to focus on the health and well-being of our children, seek to make an example of a nine-year-old boy with autism for daring to sue them,” said Noah’s attorney, Pedram Esfandiary, a partner of Los Angeles-based Wisner Baum. "The companies’ sole purpose in seeking such an obscene cost is a twisted desire to punish Noah."
The defendants in Noah's case included seven of the world's leading baby food manufacturers: Walmart, Beech-Nut, Gerber, Hain Celestial ("Earth's Best"), Sprout Organics, Plum Organics, and Nurture ("Happy Family").
All of these companies, except Gerber, are pursuing legal action against Noah.
In their court brief, the companies seeking to hold Noah accountable for costs argued that their request is reasonable. They emphasized that the assessment of costs should not be influenced by the identity of the plaintiff or the defendant, contrary to the plaintiff's assertion. According to them, when a plaintiff initiates a lawsuit and does not succeed, they are legally responsible for each category of recoverable costs.
According to ABC News - Noah's attorney is urging the judge to reject the request from the baby food makers, and asserted that, Defendants—large, wealthy, multinational corporations—aim to impose $636,731.91 in litigation costs on a nine-year-old child grappling with neurodevelopmental disorders. He added, "This move by the defendants not only lacks decency but also goes against legal principles, fairness, and basic common sense."
Esfandiary is counting on public support to intervene in this matter.
“I urge everyone, contact these companies, put pressure on them to abandon this attempt to destroy a young man's life," said Esfandiary.
The ruling does not bar the advancement of future cases related to baby food.
Bob Fiddaman
No comments: