Subway refutes a recent lab report that found that its tuna sandwiches and wraps contained no tuna DNA.
According to The New York Times, the publication had 60 inches of Subway tuna sandwiches from three different restaurants in Los Angeles tested in a lab.
The $500 lab test included a polymerase chain reaction test, which sought out the DNA of five different tuna species.
None were found.
Subway tuna sandwiches do not contain any tuna DNA, say lab tests commissioned by @nytimes.
— AJ+ (@ajplus) June 22, 2021
2 customers are suing saying its sandwiches have no tuna, which the company denies. Last year, an Irish court ruled Subway bread has too much sugar to be legally considered bread. pic.twitter.com/HS5Ngqbd6j
“There simply is no truth to the allegations in the complaint that was filed in California,” a spokeswoman wrote to publication. “Subway delivers 100 percent 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.”
Patrons are now concerned about what’s been going in their Subway sandwiches?
Me: So there’s tuna in here right
— Kofie (@Kofie) June 23, 2021
Subway: pic.twitter.com/nizZwYgc0c
The world’s largest sandwich chain was the subject of a lawsuit filed earlier this year, which alleged its tuna fish is made from “a mixture of various concoctions.”
In their lawsuit, the two plaintiffs, identified as Karen Dhanowa and Nilima Amin, say they were they “were tricked into buying food items that wholly lacked the ingredients they reasonably thought they were purchasing.”
They are suing Subway for fraud, intentional misrepresentation, unjust enrichment and other claims.
keep fishing folks, we'll keep serving 100% wild-caught tunahttps://t.co/MAhzoqa3XP pic.twitter.com/cZvDQUjrJt
— Subway® (@SUBWAY) January 29, 2021
“Consumers are consistently misled into purchasing the products for the commonly known and/or advertised benefits and characteristics of tuna when in fact no such benefits could be had, given that the products are in fact devoid of tuna,” the lawsuit claims.
The Washington Post was first to report on the lawsuit.