Tests recently done by a commercial lab have proved that no identifiable tuna DNA was found in Subways sandwiches, the New York Times reported.
The newspaper had 60 inches of tuna sandwiches from three different Subway locations in Los Angeles tested.
The tuna was removed, frozen and sent to an unidentified commercial food testing lab as the chain faces a lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California earlier this year alleging the ingredient it calls tuna actually contains no tuna at all.
No amplifiable tuna DNA was present in the sample and so we obtained no amplification products from the DNA. Therefore, we cannot identify the species, the test results read.
One, its so heavily processed that whatever we could pull out, we couldnt make an identification, a lab spokesperson said. Or we got some and theres just nothing there thats tuna.
Subway wrote an email to the newspaper denying the allegations:
There simply is no truth to the allegations in the complaint that was filed in California, a Subway spokeswoman wrote in the email. Subway delivers 100 percent cooked tuna to its restaurants.
Subway, which has nearly 40,000 locations worldwide, about half of which are in the United States, has said its tuna sandwiches are some of its best-selling items.
Weren't they also sued for claiming their bread was freshly baked?
No amplifiable tuna DNA was present in the sample and so we obtained no amplification products from the DNA. Therefore, we cannot identify the species, the test results read.
Ireland is who got upset at them because subways bread had more sugar in it than what they classify bread should have
Probably not. Since the bread is freshly baked. They have to bake the bread new everyday. It is frozen stuff before its cooked though, if thats what you mean. The only thing I remember about the bread was people saying it wasnt bread
https://vgl.ucdavis.edu/meat-id-testreading about it, apparently you can extract DNA from cooked meat, but it takes special techniques and there are papers on particular ways that you can go about it. the link you provided says that they can only distinguish between 12 specific different mammals.
You can still DNA test cooked meat according to a UCDavis FAQ. Sure itll denature at a pointbut I think you guys are jumping the gun here. Of course, the test I linked isnt for fish.
also, they could just test the uncooked tuna product... cuz they can't claim it's "always fresh" if it was precooked 1000 miles away
According to the article, Subway says that 100% cooked tuna is delivered. So, they would have to find where it's delivered from to test the uncooked product...
umm... nothing cooked is fresh, they're lying
Tests recently done by a commercial lab
When did I say anything about it being cooked fresh. All I said was, "According to the article, Subway says that 100% cooked tuna is delivered. So, they would have to find where it's delivered from to test the uncooked product..."
oh, you didn't say fresh - their slogan is Eat Fresh
reading about it, apparently you can extract DNA from cooked meat, but it takes special techniques and there are papers on particular ways that you can go about it. the link you provided says that they can only distinguish between 12 specific different mammals.I don't think it was ever in question that it wasn't some sort of meat. Just possibly some cheaper fish than tuna, and possibly filled w/ cheap additives like taco bell meat is.
so if they can't identify tuna, I would highly expect their test is insufficient and/or the amount of DNA is insufficient. not that the tuna is some unidentifiable substance that is something other than meat.
Subway is trash. And now that I know about their bread and tuna..... I may never eat there again
I thought the bread scandal w/ Subway was that they were using some chemical found in yoga mats, which they got rid of after it was brought to light...
I just saw people talking about a Subway bread scandal and thought THAT was the big one they had. Not some feud w/ the Irish over sugar levels. American bread is loaded w/ sugar in general, that's not shocking at all.
Maybe I'm the dumb one here, but if the test was reliable enough to know it wasn't tuna, why isn't reliable enough to figure out what it really is?
just b/c it's used in a non-food product doesn't mean it's harmful in food.
This is very true!
I have a friend who's convinced that sawdust in every bread so it doesn't make bread rise up as much, and also lasts longer.
Rural russia baby.
It's not sawdust... well, it technically is, it's manufactured cellulose... which happens to have a kinda sawdusty smell
They use it as a cost saving method in several brands of Parmesan cheese as well... if your Parmesan cheese has 'cellulose' as an ingredient, they're cutting corners.
Ok, to clarify: I never personally gave a shit about that chemical. They took it out of the bread once I heard about it, so going forward it wouldn't have mattered anyway, and just b/c it's used in a non-food product doesn't mean it's harmful in food.yeah, it's dumb as hell.
I just saw people talking about a Subway bread scandal and thought THAT was the big one they had. Not some feud w/ the Irish over sugar levels. American bread is loaded w/ sugar in general, that's not shocking at all.
Ok, to clarify: I never personally gave a shit about that chemical. They took it out of the bread once I heard about it, so going forward it wouldn't have mattered anyway, and just b/c it's used in a non-food product doesn't mean it's harmful in food.
@BUMPED2002The whining in that fail topic, cripes.
Here you go
The whining in that fail topic, cripes.@Soup_or_Science
My title is clearly about Subway and their tuna subs, it's not some indecipherable mess. I didn't just give out the full story in the title, oh well. I created intrigue instead. Got people to wonder, "wait... why is tuna in quotes?"
@Soup_or_ScienceGoddamn lmao it's not that serious guy
subway is nasty
like gas station food tier sandwiches
like gas station food tier sandwiches
Goddamn lmao it's not that serious guyIt's fine, I was blowing it out of proportion.
Am I the whiner he's referring to? Jeez!
I get it now, "Tuna", yeah, that makes more sense, that's more relevancy to what is going on in the topic
I literally did not even sleep last night so forgive me that I was so intricate in my detail of how I am not a frequent Subway visitor and there were certain things that just would not have been paramount/noticeably relevant to me to click the topic
But if that's "whining", I mean, okay
I'm literally not even complaining - I just talk a lot - on a neutral ground - until such an emotional sway can be easily inferred (It might seem sarcastic, too - unless it actually is)
But this is all non-essential - How about we put this behind us and go have a "Tuna" sandwich, pal? I'm certainly open to trying oneSure thing. I hear they're 65% dolphin-free now!