Food & Beverage
Subway says NY Times' DNA tests can't prove its tuna's fake
June 24, 2021
In an effort to see if Subway was serving fake tuna, the New York Times recently paid a lab to run DNA tests on samples obtained from the chain's stores in California.
The results were a bit fishy, however, revealing that the meat was either too processed to reveal fish components or if the samples lacked tuna DNA.
The Times also pointed out that DNA tests may not be conclusive since when tuna is cooked for consumption, the fish's natural qualities are changed, which can complicate the detection of tuna DNA.
In January, a class action suit filed in California alleged that based on the plaintiff's tests on a number of Subway tuna samples, the substance used in Subway's sandwiches were a blend of some things that "do not constitute tuna." Plaintiff's Karen Dhanowa and Nilima Amin are suing the chain on a number of charges including fraud and intentional misrepresentation.
In response to the New York Times tests and article, Subway told Business Insider, "A recent New York Times report indicates that DNA testing is an unreliable methodology for identifying processed tuna. This report supports and reflects the position that Subway has taken in relation to a meritless lawsuit filed in California and with respect to DNA testing as a means to identify cooked proteins. DNA testing is simply not a reliable way to identify denatured proteins, like Subway's tuna, which was cooked before it was tested."
