Subway may be sued for finding chicken, pork and cattle DNA in a ‘100% real’ tuna sandwich

A woman who says she ordered tuna sandwiches at Subway more than 100 times over six years has won the approval of a California judge to sue the fast-food chain for alleging that she deceive your customers.

Subway tuna sandwich. Photo: Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

The conflict dates back to January 2021, when Neelima Amin learned of something DNA of chickens, pigs and cattle was found by a marine biologist in twenty samples of tuna fish at Subway. This finding alarmed some people who, due to health issues or religious reasons, do not consume these types of meat.

Amin, a resident of Alameda County, based his claim on laboratory tests carried out at the Barber’s Laboratory of the University of California, Los Angeles, where Undetectable DNA sequenced from tuna in 19 samples, while all 20 samples contained DNA from chickens, 11 from pigs and 7 from cattle.

The lawsuit seeks damages for Fraud and violation of consumer protection laws California.

Subway, which has more than 37,000 locations, insists that products that fall under this category are “100% tuna” and that they use the “wild-caught” list regulated by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

“While Subway’s interpretations may be correct, it is also possible that these claims refer to ingredients that a reasonable consumer would not expect to find in a tuna product,” District Judge John Teegar ruled July 7.

Description of Tigar also Baby born prematurely Accept Subway’s argument that any non-tuna DNA present could result from eggs in mayonnaise or from cross-contact with other ingredients handled by employees.

SAN ANSELMO, CA - JUNE 22: A Subway tuna sandwich is on display on June 22, 2021 in San Anselmo, California.  A recent laboratory analysis of Subway tuna commissioned by the New York Times revealed no tuna DNA in samples from Subway tuna.  The lab was unable to identify a species in tuna samples from three sandwich shops in the Los Angeles Subway area.  (Image illustration by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)

Subway can be sued for finding DNA from chicken, pork and cattle in a “100% real” tuna sandwich. Photo: Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

He pointed out that the plaintiff Nelima Amin can try to prove that salads, sandwiches, and wraps ‘totally lack’ tuna.

The original class action lawsuit, filed in January 2021, included a claim that the company’s tuna products were made from a “blend” that also contained other types of fish.

The court document claimed that independent testing “repeatedly” showed Subway made its tuna product without tuna, but the plaintiffs amended their claims in June 2021 to focus instead on whether Subway served “caught and yellowfin tuna.” 100% sustainably.

Campaign against Subway?

Subway lawyers at the time argued that any traces of other ingredients found in tuna products could result from cross-contact when making other sandwiches or from eggs in mayonnaise.

Subway has strongly defended its products. According to the restaurant chain, its suppliers to the United States require advertisements about species, fishing method, and tracking information for each fish delivery. She has also launched a website to counter what she describes as “myths” about tuna, too “Misinformation being generated in the media”.

“The court decided to allow the complaint to be filed, despite the fact that the allegations are untenable in fact and law. While the verdict is disappointing, we hope to prove that our tuna is real tuna, once and for all. There is no doubt that the prosecution does not It is completely unfounded and the evidence will prove it. Our situation has not changed: we offer 100% real wild-caught tuna,” says the site.

SAN ANSELMO, CA - JUNE 22: A worker at a Subway sandwich shop makes a tuna sandwich on June 22, 2021 in San Anselmo, California.  A recent laboratory analysis of Subway tuna commissioned by the New York Times revealed no tuna DNA in samples from Subway tuna.  The lab was unable to identify a species in tuna samples from three sandwich shops in the Los Angeles Subway area.  (Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)

Subway can be sued for finding DNA from chicken, pork and cattle in a “100% real” tuna sandwich. Photo: Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

In February 2021, the Business Insider team submitted samples of tuna sandwiches in Queens for analysis and found that they were made with tuna. But four months later, the New York Times sent some of the Subway tuna to a commercial lab, which told the publication that “there is no amplifiable DNA for tuna,” so it could not identify the species.

Subway says investigate The New York Times It hasn’t been proven that the Subway tuna wasn’t really tuna, arguing that a DNA deficiency was found”It was a problem with the test, not with the tuna“.

The sandwich chain revamped its menu last summer with new ingredients and altered existing ingredients, but CEO John Chidsey said, “The only thing we haven’t touched is our tuna.”

Where does cheating occur?

Between 2013 and 2019, Amin ordered and ate more than 100 tuna products from the Subway location in Palo Alto, California, for “health and weight loss purposes.”

Specifically, each time the plaintiff visited the Subway to order a sandwich, looked at the menu, recognized the food option designated as “tuna,” ordered a sandwich or roll because it was identified as “tuna,” and consumed tuna products, all with The suit is the understanding and belief that what he was eating was actually just tuna.

The document claims that Subway stores throughout California source their tuna fromsame supply chainWhere, at some point, cheating can occur.

“Defendants are not taking adequate measures to control or prevent known risks of adulteration of their tuna products. Instead, they actively perpetuate actions and steps that encourage mixing or allow non-tuna ingredients to make their way into products,” the lawsuit added.

You may also be interested in | on the video

Why is eating organic chicken a good idea? (albeit a little more expensive)

Leave a Comment