Lawsuit Blames Heavy Metals in Baby Food for Autism, ADHD Diagnosis Impacting 2 Year Old Child

A Florida mother indicates in a recently filed lawsuit  that toxic heavy metals in major baby food brands caused her 2-year-old child to develop autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), alleging that the heavy metals are either the result of a defective design or manufacturing problems.

Jennis Rivera filed the complaint (PDF) on February 18, pursuing damages for herself and her minor child, identified only with the initials B.M.

The lawsuit names numerous food companies as defendants, including Beech-Nut Nutrition Company, Campbell Soup Company, Gerber Products Company, Hain Celestial Group, Inc., Hero A.G., Neptune Wellness Solutions, Nestlé S.A., Plum, PBC, Sprout Foods, Inc., and Sun-Maid Growers of California, indicating that they have each sold and distributed baby foods that contain heavy metals known to pose serious health risks for children.

Concerns about toxic metal in baby foods emerged in 2021, when Congress released a report on the widespread presence of high levels of arsenic, lead, cadmium and mercury in a number of popular baby food products. The report warned that infant exposure to these heavy metals may heighten the risk of serious developmental disorders, such as autism and ADHD, as well as other cognitive and behavioral issues that can affect a child’s development and long-term health.

While health experts and regulators have called for manufacturers to remove these contaminants from their products, recent testing has shown that toxic heavy metals in baby foods remain a problem. A report published last year found that popular baby food brands sold by Gerber, Beech-Nut, Sprout, Walmart and others still have potentially dangerous levels of arsenic, cadmium and lead, all of which can increase the risk of neurological side effects for children.

Rivera’s complaint joins a growing number of similar toxic baby food lawsuits already being pursued by families nationwide, each raising similar allegations that manufacturers exploited parents’ trust by marketing the products as safe, while concealing the presence of dangerous levels of toxic metals for years.

According to the lawsuit filed by Rivera, B.M. was diagnosed with autism and ADHD by the age of 2, after having eaten defendants’ baby food products, which were contaminated with heavy metals.

“Based on prevailing scientific evidence, exposure to the Toxic Heavy Metals at the levels contained in Defendants’ Baby Foods can cause brain injury which can manifest as the neurodevelopmental disorders ASD and ADHD and related sequelae in humans,” Rivera’s lawsuit states. “Had any Defendant warned Plaintiff’s parents that Defendants’ Baby Foods could lead to exposure to Toxic Heavy Metals or, in turn, brain injury, Plaintiff would not have consumed the Baby Foods.”

The lawsuit indicates the heavy metals in baby food make the products defective, and should not be present. It points out that if the metals were not supposed to be there, then the products were defectively manufactured, and if the companies intended to sell baby food with heavy metals, then the products were defectively designed.

“Whether the Defendants’ products were defective due to inadequate warnings, manufacturing errors, or by design, the existing publicly available evidence indicates that consumption of Defendants’ baby food products exposed Plaintiff to Toxic Heavy Metals, and that Defendants’ baby food products contributed to Plaintiff’s Toxic Heavy Metal burden during a critical period of infant neurodevelopment,” the lawsuit notes. “Plaintiff, thus, alleges that this cumulative exposure from Defendants’ products to Toxic Heavy Metals, substantially contributed to causing neurodevelopmental harm that manifested as ASD and ADHD.”

Rivera presents claims of failure to warn, manufacturing defect, design defect, negligent failure to warn, negligence – manufacturing, negligence – product design, general negligence, and seeks both compensatory and punitive damages.

Toxic Baby Food Lawsuits

Rivera’s complaint will be centralized with similar claims as part of a toxic baby food lawsuit multidistrict litigation (MDL), which was established in April 2024, consolidating the claims before U.S. District Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley in the Northern District of California for coordinated discovery and pretrial proceedings.

As part of the coordinated management of the growing litigation, Judge Corley has indicated that the court will first evaluate the strength of evidence linking toxic baby food to autism, ADHD and other developmental injuries.

After general causation issues are resolved, if the Court determines that plaintiffs have sufficient evidence establishing that toxic metals in the baby food can cause the injuries claimed, it is expected that Judge Corley will schedule a series of “bellwether” trials in the MDL, to help gauge how juries may respond to certain evidence and testimony that will be repeated throughout the claims.

In addition to the federal litigation, there are also a number of toxic baby food lawsuits pending in California state court, where it is expected that the first trial may begin sometime in late 2025, to help gauge how juries are likely to respond to certain evidence and testimony that will be repeated throughout the litigation.

While the outcome of those trials will not have any binding impact on other claims, they will be closely watched, as the average jury payouts awarded may influence how much the manufacturers need to pay in autism or ADHD settlements to resolve the litigation.