Jashan was recently hospitalized for severe poisoning as a result of some medications that he had been taking. When the hospital began treating Jashan they discovered two partially digested capsules of "acetaminophen" which is a headache relieving drug. Only two companies sell acetaminophen in BC, and Jashan had taken one pill from each company: Metro Pharma Inc. and Bond Drugs Co. While acetaminophen is generally fine, both of Jashan's pills had been negligently manufactured and included a toxic substance called "Seinolip". While not always the case, Seinolip has been known to cause allergic reactions in 25% of individuals who ingest it. When Jashan took the tainted pills one of them caused a severe allergic reaction which led to his hospitalization. Unfortunately, even after significant testing, it was not possible to determine which capsule caused the allergic reaction. Despite that, Jashan has been hospitalized for over a month and knows a pill caused the harm. Jashan wants to sue Metro Pharma Inc. for negligence because the company is valued at over one billion dollars. Metro Pharma Inc. claims that they were not negligent. Assume Jashan sued for negligence and the court has already found a duty of care and breach of that duty. Did Metro cause the loss suffered by Jashan? Explain using the legal test for this specific element of negligence. (6 marks)