Originally Posted by
cblaisd
From today's
NumLock News
A U.S. District Court judge has said that Subway will indeed have to go to court over the proposed class-action lawsuit alleging that it deceived consumers about their tuna. The sandwich shop has been on a blistering PR counteroffensive amid claims from a plaintiff that DNA tests carried out by UCLA’s Barber Lab purportedly found 19 out of 20 samples of Subway’s tuna contained no detectable tuna DNA; while all 20 had chicken DNA, 11 had pork DNA and seven had cattle DNA. Subway argued that the presence of non-tuna DNA was because of eggs in mayonnaise and possible cross-contact, and that the suit should be thrown out, though the judge decided to let this one play out.
Jonathan Stempel, Reuters
I'm a bit dubious about that. I don't know about the outlet in the US, but over here, there are separate scoops here for the scoopable stuff (eg, there is a ladel for the "pizza sauce", separate from the tuna, separate from the egg salad, etc. etc.). detectable chicken DNA, fine. Bovine or pork? Depends on what the previous person(s) ordered...maybe in trace amounts. I do wonder if it might be some other type of fish, not necessarily tuna. So maybe carp or cod or some sort of bass? There should be some tuna....
One thing they could do is invite some reporters to a few factories where the "tuna salad" is made and let them film the process.
This kinda reminds me about the beef fat McD used to use in their fries.