Holy Carp: A Lab Analysis Of Subway Tuna Sandwiches Fails To Identify Tuna DNA
Everyone has their go-to restaurant when it comes to sub sandwiches, and people are often very particular about the kind of proteins and toppings they pile on to it. Is tuna one of your favorite options? Well, a recent investigation conducted by The New York Times might have you second-guessing your choices.
If you’re eating a Subway sandwich right now, you might want to put it down.
Something (Not So) Fishy Is Going On Here
Subway’s website describes their tuna sub as, “100% wild-caught tuna blended with creamy mayonnaise then topped with your choice of crisp, fresh veggies. 100% delicious.”
“Wild-caught tuna” eh? Well, the folks at The New York Times decided to actually put that to the test.
The New York Times Investigation
Julia Carmel, a reporter for The New York Times decided to investigate. She collected 60 inches worth of Subway tuna subs from three separate restaurant locations in Los Angeles, removed the meat, froze it, and then sent it to a food testing lab for DNA analysis.
After a month, the lab came back with the results.
What The Lab Results Revealed
“No amplifiable tuna DNA was present in the sample and so we obtained no amplification products from the DNA,” according to the lab results. “Therefore, we cannot identify the species.”
The lab said there could only be two possibilities for this outcome. First, the protein was so heavily processed that whatever was pulled out could not be accurately identified, or that the sandwich just simply does not contain any tuna.
More Bad News For Subway
Subway has had... a rocky year. In January, rumors of the sandwich not actually containing tuna made headlines when two California women filed a lawsuit, alleging the subs didn't contain any tuna.
In 2020, an Irish court ruled that Subway bread cannot legally be called “bread” because it contains too much sugar. They said it's more akin to "confectionary or fancy baked good," as its sugar-to-flour ratio was nearly five times too high to fall within the legal standard of staple foods,” according to NBC News. They add that all of Subway’s heated bread options have a sugar content of 10 percent.
Subway’s Official Response
On their website, Subway says they only sell yellowfin and skipjack tuna. In response to the bombshell lab results, Subway made an official statement to The Times, writing in an email that “There simply is no truth to the allegations in the complaint that was filed in California.”
They add, “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.”
An Important Caveat
In light of the lab results, The Times acknowledges that that in an earlier investigation conducted by Inside Edition, their lab testing found that the sandwiches did in fact contain real tuna.
Moreover, the reporter noted that “Once tuna has been cooked, its DNA becomes denatured — meaning that the fish’s characteristic properties have likely been destroyed, making it difficult, if not impossible, to identify.”
Field Day
Needless to say, the internet is having an ocean-sized field day with the results of The Times investigation, and whether you’re pro-Subway, anti-Subway or you just have no idea what’s going on, everyone has an opinion.
Let’s dive into those Twitter comments.
More Tuna-tacular Tweets
While Twitter is trending with Subway-based tuna jokes, other users just wondered who in their right mind would order a sandwich containing fish from Subway anyways.
Other users were comically apathetic. One user writes, “Look man…if you go to Subway for a tuna sandwich, you deserve whatever happens to you after that.”
Coming To Subway’s Defense
Some Twitter users were quick to defend Subway and criticized The Times for running with the article as is, yet addressing later on that the reason no tuna DNA showed up in the results was possibly due to the cooking process degrading the DNA.
One user viewed Subway through a more critical lens, and wrote that even if Subway’s canneries lied to them about what’s in the tuna, the chain should have done their due diligence writing, “if you’re Subway and ordering a quadrillion tons of tuna, you have a lot more power in talking to the person who supplies it.”
What Are Your Thoughts?
Are you still a die-hard Subway fan who’ll continue to enjoy the tuna sub? Or are you dropping your sub in the garbage as we speak and calling up Quiznos or Jimmy John’s? Either way, it seems like the Subway-tuna sandwich saga is far from over.
Let us know what you think in the comments!
