Subway sued over its '100% tuna' claim
 

Found this interesting ,

Amin's lawsuit cites a marine biologist who analyzed 20 samples of tuna offerings from 20 different Subway restaurants and found "no detectable tuna DNA sequences whatsoever" in 19 samples. But, Amin says, the samples did contain other types of animal DNA, such as from chicken and pork.

Who would have guessed a Tuna sub isn’t Tuna anymore ..

I have seen articles about Chilean sea bass being sold . That are some other fish entirely .


https://www.reuters.com/business/ret...es-2022-07-11/

Subway food sucks. How the hell do you think they can afford to hire Tom Brady, Steph Curry, Simone Bile and Charles Barkley. If I were to buy a sub, I would go to one of the local, family owned places in my town.

+1 on what Paul said.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Dang. Not only is it lousy practice, there are people with religious dietary requirements that could sue the pants off Subway. Imagine being Kosher or Halal and your Tuna Sub had pork.

Just part of the corporate crime in this country.

FBI white-collar crime statistics show that these criminal offenses cost the US over $300 billion per year.

A little more than half is prosecuted
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Coincidentally,,, made my own for lunch today from a can of Star Kiss ,,, it looked like tuna.. ;-)