The “concoctions” apparently “do not constitute tuna.”
A new lawsuit filed in Northern California alleges that Subway has not been making their tuna sandwiches out of tuna at all, instead actually using "a mixture of various concoctions that do not constitute tuna,” according to The Washington Post. Apparently, the individual who filed the lawsuit had multiple independent lab tests done, which supposedly revealed that Subway blended together multiple “concoctions” to imitate tuna.
Subway representatives have claimed that the lawsuit has no merit and that their tuna is legitimate. Subway refutes these claims in a statement given to The Washington Post, stating, "There simply is no truth to the allegations in the complaint that was filed in California. Subway delivers 100 percent cooked tuna to its restaurants, which is mixed with mayonnaise and used in freshly made sandwiches, wraps and salads that are served to and enjoyed by our guests. The taste and quality of our tuna make it one of Subway's most popular products and these baseless accusations threaten to damage our franchisees, small business owners who work tirelessly to uphold the high standards that Subway sets for all of its products, including its tuna.”
Carl Court/Getty Images
Unfortunately, this isn't the first time Subway has been in the news for this type of mock-food fodder. The Irish Supreme Court previously ruled that Subway’s bread did not legally constitute bread in late 2020. The case found that Subway’s bread used five times as much sugar as legally allowed in Ireland, and therefore could not legally be considered bread.
More digging needs to be done to determine whether there is truth to this new lawsuit, but it’s safe to assume that many will be avoiding a tuna footlong from Subway for the foreseeable future.