Subway reiterates that its tuna is real in a new website

The newly launched website refutes claims that Subway’s tuna is not actual tuna

Subway reiterates that its tuna is real in a new website 16
ADVERTISEMENT

Subway has launched a brand-new website dedicated to busting myths about its fan-favorite tuna.

Called SubwayTunaFacts.com, the no-nonsense site presents pieces of information refuting claims that the fast food chain’s tuna can’t be considered as actual tuna.

The website’s homepage greets visitors with the bold affirmation that “SUBWAY TUNA IS REAL TUNA”. “That’s right. The truth is, Subway uses wild-caught skipjack tuna regulated by the Food and Drug Administration. A favorite among sub lovers, our tuna is and has always been high-quality, premium and 100% real,” reads the website’s opening statement.

The quality of Subway’s sandwich components has been the subject of controversies over the last few years. Just this past January, two Bay Area residents filed a lawsuit alleging that Subway’s tuna is not fish, but rather, a “mixture of various concoctions that do not constitute tuna, yet have been blended together by defendants to imitate the appearance of tuna.” This accusation was based on the results of independent lab tests done on the plaintiffs’ behalf, which used “multiple samples” of Subway tuna from different Subway restaurants in California.

After that lawsuit made headlines, the New York Times did its own independent study and subsequently published a story claiming that Subway’s tuna is not actually tuna. In its new website, Subway dubs the New York Times’ claim as a “myth”. According to the restaurant chain, “what actually happened is that The New York Times commissioned a test that couldn’t detect tuna DNA in their sample… This is not unusual when testing cooked tuna and it absolutely doesn’t mean the sample that was tested contained zero tuna.”

“If the test had confirmed the existence of a protein other than tuna, questions could have been raised,” adds Subway. “However, their ‘non-detect’ conclusion really just means that the test was inadequate in determining what the protein was. In other words, it was a problem with the test, not the tuna.”

To further support its defense, Subway is asking its customers to read USA Today’s independent fact-check, which reportedly found the New York Times’ conclusion lacking of “important context about the limitations of DNA testing of denatured proteins.” Subway also notes that “the challenge of accurately testing processed tuna DNA has been known for a while, and even studied by scientists.

Subway’s new website also features a “Tuna Q&A” section that answers the most common questions surrounding the chain’s tuna controversy. There’s also a colorful infographic that details how Subway sources, cooks, and distributes their tunas before serving them at their over 40,000 locations around the world.

Source: ComicBook.com