July 31, 2021
Subway tuna sandwiches

Subway tuna sandwiches

Analysis of Subway tuna sandwiches fails to identify tuna DNA Lab

Subway tuna sandwiches
Subway tuna sandwiches

Subway tuna A lab test commissioned by the New York Times failed to identify any tuna DNA in a series of Subway tuna sandwiches.

Subway bread is not bread, Irish court rules

Read more
A reporter acquired “more than 60in worth of Subway tuna sandwiches” from three Los Angeles storefronts, then engaged a specialized fish-testing lab. Researchers were unable to pinpoint a species.

“There’s two conclusions,” a lab spokesperson told the Times. “One, it’s so heavily processed that whatever we could pull out, we couldn’t make an identification.

“Or we got some and there’s just nothing there that’s tuna.” Subway tuna

Subway tuna In February, when Inside Edition ran a similar test based on samples from New York, a Florida-based lab, Applied Food Technologies, did confirm the presence of tuna.

In January, when two California customers filed a lawsuit claiming the products “are made from anything but tuna”.

Instead, the plaintiffs alleged, the controversial comestibles are “made from a mixture of various concoctions”, ingredients “blended together … to imitate the appearance of tuna”.

Subway, which has more than 22,000 storefronts across the US, has has been dogged by legal action, including a class-action complaint that said its $5 foot-long sandwiches were in fact only 11 to 11.5in long.

It has fiercely defended the integrity of its tuna supply, calling the recent lawsuit “baseless”. Earlier this year, it touted its “100% real wild-caught tuna” on its website and offered a 15% discount on foot-long tuna subs under the promo code “ITSREAL”.

Subway tuna Bread or unbread? Subway and other high street sandwiches reviewed
Read more
Earlier this month, the California customers who sued Subway walked back some of their more incendiary claims. But they still claimed “labeling, marketing and advertising” for Subway’s tuna products was “false and misleading”.

The headline-making case has sparked concern among consumers and responses from competitors. Other sandwich makers have pointed out that tuna is a relatively inexpensive meat, so Subway has little incentive to substitute a cheaper version.

Seafood experts have suggested Subway may not be to blame if its tuna is in fact not tuna.

“I don’t think a sandwich place would intentionally mislabel,” Dave Rudie, president of Catalina Offshore Products, told the Times. “They’re buying a can of tuna that says ‘tuna’. If there’s any fraud in this case, it happened at the cannery.”

Subway tuna we have a small favour to ask. Millions are turning to the Guardian for open, independent, quality news every day, and readers in 180 countries around the world now support us financially.

We believe everyone deserves access to information that’s grounded in science and truth, and analysis rooted in authority and integrity. That’s why we made a different choice: to keep our reporting open for all readers, regardless of where they live or what they can afford to pay. This means more people can be better informed, united, and inspired to take meaningful action.

In these perilous times, a truth-seeking global news organisation like the Guardian is essential. We have no shareholders or billionaire owner, meaning our journalism is free from commercial and political influence – this makes us different. When it’s never been more important, our independence allows us to fearlessly investigate, challenge and expose those in power

In the lawsuit filed in January, plaintiffs allege Subway’s tuna is made “from a mixture of various concoctions that do not constitute tuna, yet have been blended together by Defendants to imitate the appearance of tuna.” The complaint allegedly comes after the plaintiffs had “multiple samples” of the tuna taken from Subway locations across California tested at independent labs


Subway tuna n a statement given to PEOPLE, a Subway spokesperson responded to the suit, saying: “There simply is no truth to the allegations in the complaint that was filed in California.”

“Subway delivers 100% cooked tuna to its restaurants, which is mixed with mayonnaise and used in freshly made sandwiches, wraps and salads that are served to and enjoyed by our guests.  The taste and quality of our tuna make it one of Subway’s most popular products and these baseless accusations threaten to damage our franchisees, small business owners who work tirelessly to uphold the high standards that Subway sets for all of its products, including its tuna,” the chain said. “Given the facts, the lawsuit constitutes a reckless and improper attack on Subway’s brand and goodwill, and on the livelihood of its California franchisees.  Indeed, there is no basis in law or fact for the plaintiffs’ claims, which are frivolous and are being pursued without adequate investigation.”

Source link