The fight over whether or not the tuna in Subway’s famous sandwich is real continues as a new version of the lawsuit has returned.<o:p></o:p>

Karen Dhanowa and Nilima Amin have accused that Subway, the famous sandwich chain, deceives it clients by advertising ‘100% tuna’ in their tuna sandwiches. They have claimed that lab testing has shown that these sandwiches contain proteins such as pork, cattle and chicken and are not 100 per cent tuna. <o:p></o:p>

A new version of the earlier proposed class action has now been filed by Dhanowa and Amin in the federal court in San Francisco.

<o:p>Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/our-tuna-is-real-subway-dismisses-media-reports-about-key-ingredient-missing-in-sandwich-398653">Our tuna is real: Subway dismisses media reports about key ingredient missing in sandwich</a></o:p>

Subway, however, has denied these accusations and have claimed that the lawsuits have "filed three meritless complaints, changing their story each time". In its defense, the eating joint has claimed that the tuna sandwiches are "high-quality, wild-caught, 100nearly % tuna".<o:p></o:p>

This case dates back in June 2021 when the two customers had filed a lawsuit in California alleging the same that Subway’s famous tuna sandwiches are made up from anything but tuna. On the basis of this, a lab test was performed by the New York Times had claimed that there were no traces of tuna DNA in some of the samples collected by the investigators.

<o:p>Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/wheres-the-tuna-investigation-reveals-important-ingredient-missing-in-subways-sandwich-393404">Where's the tuna? Investigation reveals important ingredient missing</a></o:p>

"There’s two conclusions, one, it's so heavily processed that whatever we could pull out, we couldn’t make an identification," a lab spokesperson was quoted by the Times. "Or we got some and there's just nothing there that’s tuna."<o:p></o:p>

Later, Subway had issued an informal statement on their website slamming the accusations and had reiterated that ‘Subway tuna is real tuna’.<o:p></o:p>

"That’s right.&nbsp;The truth is, Subway uses wild-caught skipjack tuna regulated by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). A favorite among sub lovers, our tuna is and has always been high-quality, premium and 100% real," the website&nbsp;read.<o:p></o:p>

The chain had also explained that "according to scientific experts, this is not unusual when testing cooked tuna and it absolutely doesn’t mean the sample that was tested contained zero tuna".<o:p></o:p>

The fight over whether or not the tuna in Subway’s famous sandwich is real continues as a new version of the lawsuit has returned. Karen Dhanowa and Nilima Amin have accused that Subway, the famous sandwich chain, deceives it clients by advertising ‘100% tuna’ in their tuna sandwiches.

The fight over whether or not the tuna in Subway’s famous sandwich is real continues as a new version of the lawsuit has returned. Karen Dhanowa and Nilima Amin have accused that Subway, the famous sandwich chain, deceives it clients by advertising ‘100% tuna’ in their tuna sandwiches. They have claimed that lab testing has shown that these sandwiches contain proteins such as pork, cattle and chicken and are not 100 per cent tuna. A new version of the earlier proposed class action has now been filed by Dhanowa and Amin in the federal court in San Francisco. Also read | Our tuna is real: Subway dismisses media reports about key ingredient missing in sandwich Subway, however, has denied these accusations and have claimed that the lawsuits have "filed three meritless complaints, changing their story each time". In its defense, the eating joint has claimed that the tuna sandwiches are "high-quality, wild-caught, 100nearly % tuna". This case dates back in June 2021 when the two customers had filed a lawsuit in California alleging the same that Subway’s famous tuna sandwiches are made up from anything but tuna. On the basis of this, a lab test was performed by the New York Times had claimed that there were no traces of tuna DNA in some of the samples collected by the investigators. Also read | Where's the tuna? Investigation reveals important ingredient missing "There’s two conclusions, one, it's so heavily processed that whatever we could pull out, we couldn’t make an identification," a lab spokesperson was quoted by the Times. "Or we got some and there's just nothing there that’s tuna." Later, Subway had issued an informal statement on their website slamming the accusations and had reiterated 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 (FDA). A favorite among sub lovers, our tuna is and has always been high-quality, premium and 100% real," the website read. The chain had also explained that "according to scientific experts, this is not unusual when testing cooked tuna and it absolutely doesn’t mean the sample that was tested contained zero tuna".

Something's not fishy? Subway's tuna sandwich lawsuit is back

A few weeks after a group of researchers claimed that something is not fishy in Subway’s tuna sandwich, the fast-food chain jumped to its own defence.

A New York Times investigation recently claimed that that tuna in the Subway’s tuna sandwich may not be real. However, to tackle this criticism, the sandwich chain has launched a website, &nbsp;subwaytunafacts.com.

Also read |&nbsp;<a data-ctorig="https://www.wionews.com/world/wheres-the-tuna-investigation-reveals-important-ingredient-missing-in-subways-sandwich-393404" data-cturl="https://www.google.com/url?client=internal-element-cse&amp;cx=006054055338965708568:09spwrlibei&amp;q=https://www.wionews.com/world/wheres-the-tuna-investigation-reveals-important-ingredient-missing-in-subways-sandwich-393404&amp;sa=U&amp;ved=2ahUKEwjVmtPL6-nxAhVXzzgGHep3AUkQFjAAegQIABAC&amp;usg=AOvVaw2hxxCBkPPe0Boi5VfPh4dp" dir="ltr" href="https://www.wionews.com/world/wheres-the-tuna-investigation-reveals-important-ingredient-missing-in-subways-sandwich-393404" target="_blank">Where's the tuna? Investigation reveals important ingredient missing</a>

The website claims that "Subway tuna is real tuna" in all bold letters. "That’s right.&nbsp;The truth is, Subway uses wild-caught skipjack tuna regulated by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). A favorite among sub lovers, our tuna is and has always been high-quality, premium and 100% real," the website reads further.

Subway experts have hit back at the New York Times investigation team and have labelled their investigation conclusion as a "myth". In the investigation, researchers said they could not detect any trace of tuna in their tuna sandwich during a DNA test.

Also read |&nbsp;<a data-ctorig="https://www.wionews.com/world/here-is-why-an-irish-court-ruled-subway-bread-is-not-a-bread-331999" data-cturl="https://www.google.com/url?client=internal-element-cse&amp;cx=006054055338965708568:09spwrlibei&amp;q=https://www.wionews.com/world/here-is-why-an-irish-court-ruled-subway-bread-is-not-a-bread-331999&amp;sa=U&amp;ved=2ahUKEwjVmtPL6-nxAhVXzzgGHep3AUkQFjABegQIBBAC&amp;usg=AOvVaw2xG1EpK3U-Ph_M6OdvCoGv" dir="ltr" href="https://www.wionews.com/world/here-is-why-an-irish-court-ruled-subway-bread-is-not-a-bread-331999" target="_blank">Here is why an Irish court ruled&nbsp;Subway&nbsp;bread 'is not a bread'</a>

However, Subway claims that "according to scientific experts, this is not unusual when testing cooked tuna and it absolutely doesn’t mean the sample that was tested contained zero tuna."

It further alleged that the DNA test conducted in some "unnamed" lab was the problem and not the famous tuna sandwich. Subway claims that if the test would have reported the existence of any other protein other than tuna, then the theory would have made sense. However, the fact that no protein was determined proves that the problem lies in the test, and not the sandwich, Subway claims.

The sandwich shop has also added a section of FAQs and a graphic-info to detail their proof against the New York Times investigation.

A few weeks after a group of researchers claimed that something is not fishy in Subway’s tuna sandwich, the fast-food chain jumped to its own defence. A New York Times investigation recently claimed that that tuna in the Subway’s tuna sandwich may not be real.

A few weeks after a group of researchers claimed that something is not fishy in Subway’s tuna sandwich, the fast-food chain jumped to its own defence. A New York Times investigation recently claimed that that tuna in the Subway’s tuna sandwich may not be real. However, to tackle this criticism, the sandwich chain has launched a website, subwaytunafacts.com. Also read | Where's the tuna? Investigation reveals important ingredient missing The website claims that "Subway tuna is real tuna" in all bold letters. "That’s right. The truth is, Subway uses wild-caught skipjack tuna regulated by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). A favorite among sub lovers, our tuna is and has always been high-quality, premium and 100% real," the website reads further. Subway experts have hit back at the New York Times investigation team and have labelled their investigation conclusion as a "myth". In the investigation, researchers said they could not detect any trace of tuna in their tuna sandwich during a DNA test. Also read | Here is why an Irish court ruled Subway bread 'is not a bread' However, Subway claims that "according to scientific experts, this is not unusual when testing cooked tuna and it absolutely doesn’t mean the sample that was tested contained zero tuna." It further alleged that the DNA test conducted in some "unnamed" lab was the problem and not the famous tuna sandwich. Subway claims that if the test would have reported the existence of any other protein other than tuna, then the theory would have made sense. However, the fact that no protein was determined proves that the problem lies in the test, and not the sandwich, Subway claims. The sandwich shop has also added a section of FAQs and a graphic-info to detail their proof against the New York Times investigation.

Our tuna is real: Subway dismisses media reports about key ingredient missing in sandwich

Subway, the global sandwich shop chain, is famous for their delicious ‘subs’. But it turned out that there might be a foul play of ingredients in their food.

A lab test, commissioned by the New York Times, found no trace of tuna DNA in a few samples of Subway’s tuna sandwiches.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/science/colombia-is-home-to-20-of-all-butterfly-species-in-the-world-study-finds-393385" hreflang="en">Colombia is home to 20% of all butterfly species in the world, study finds</a>

To investigate the ingredients of the famous sandwich, a reporter from the New York Times got "more than 60in worth of Subway tuna sandwiches" from three stores in Los Angeles and put them to a specialised fish-testing lab for a DNA test.

Interestingly, researchers in the lab were unable to identify traces of any species in the sandwiches.

"There’s two conclusions, one, it's so heavily processed that whatever we could pull out, we couldn’t make an identification," a lab spokesperson was quoted by the Times. "Or we got some and there's just nothing there that’s tuna."

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/science/how-nasas-plans-to-send-detergent-to-iss-could-change-space-exploration-393320" hreflang="en">How NASA's plans to send detergent to ISS could change space exploration</a>

The matter came to light when two customers filed a lawsuit in California alleging that Subway’s tuna sandwiches are made from "anything but tuna”. They claimed the sandwiches are "made from a mixture of various concoctions”, ingredients "blended together … to imitate the appearance of tuna".

After the accusation, Subway started advertising their sandwiches as "100% real wild-caught tuna" on its website and even offered a 15 per cent discount with promo code "ITSREAL".

Subway has not yet commented on the&nbsp;issue yet.

Subway, the global sandwich shop chain, is famous for their delicious ‘subs’. But it turned out that there might be a foul play of ingredients in their food. A lab test, commissioned by the New York Times, found no trace of tuna DNA in a few samples of Subway’s tuna sandwiches.

Subway, the global sandwich shop chain, is famous for their delicious ‘subs’. But it turned out that there might be a foul play of ingredients in their food. A lab test, commissioned by the New York Times, found no trace of tuna DNA in a few samples of Subway’s tuna sandwiches. Also read | Colombia is home to 20% of all butterfly species in the world, study finds To investigate the ingredients of the famous sandwich, a reporter from the New York Times got "more than 60in worth of Subway tuna sandwiches" from three stores in Los Angeles and put them to a specialised fish-testing lab for a DNA test. Interestingly, researchers in the lab were unable to identify traces of any species in the sandwiches. "There’s two conclusions, one, it's so heavily processed that whatever we could pull out, we couldn’t make an identification," a lab spokesperson was quoted by the Times. "Or we got some and there's just nothing there that’s tuna." Also read | How NASA's plans to send detergent to ISS could change space exploration The matter came to light when two customers filed a lawsuit in California alleging that Subway’s tuna sandwiches are made from "anything but tuna”. They claimed the sandwiches are "made from a mixture of various concoctions”, ingredients "blended together … to imitate the appearance of tuna". After the accusation, Subway started advertising their sandwiches as "100% real wild-caught tuna" on its website and even offered a 15 per cent discount with promo code "ITSREAL". Subway has not yet commented on the issue yet.

Where's the tuna? Investigation reveals important ingredient missing in Subway's sandwich

Ireland's Supreme Court has ruled that bread sold by the fast food chain Subway contains so much sugar that it cannot be legally defined as bread.

The ruling came in a tax dispute brought by Bookfinders Limited, an Irish Subway franchisee, which argued that some of its takeaway products, including teas, coffees and heated sandwiches, were not liable for value-added tax.

A panel of judges rejected the appeal Tuesday, ruling that the bread sold by Subway contains too much sugar to be categorized as a ''staple food,''&nbsp;which is not taxed.

''There is no dispute that the bread supplied by Subway in its heated sandwiches has a sugar content of 10% of the weight of the flour included in the dough, and thus exceeds the 2 per cent&nbsp;specified,''&nbsp;the judgement read.

The law makes a distinction between ''bread as a staple food,&nbsp;and other baked goods, which are, or approach, confectionery or fancy baked goods,''&nbsp;the judgement said.

Bookfinders was appealing a 2006 decision by authorities who refused to refund value-added tax payments. Lower courts had dismissed the case before it reached the Supreme Court.

Ireland's Supreme Court has ruled that bread sold by the fast food chain Subway contains so much sugar that it cannot be legally defined as bread. The ruling came in a tax dispute brought by Bookfinders Limited, an Irish Subway franchisee, which argued that some of its takeaway products, including teas, coffees and heated sandwiches, were not liable for value-added tax.

Ireland's Supreme Court has ruled that bread sold by the fast food chain Subway contains so much sugar that it cannot be legally defined as bread. The ruling came in a tax dispute brought by Bookfinders Limited, an Irish Subway franchisee, which argued that some of its takeaway products, including teas, coffees and heated sandwiches, were not liable for value-added tax. A panel of judges rejected the appeal Tuesday, ruling that the bread sold by Subway contains too much sugar to be categorized as a ''staple food,'' which is not taxed. ''There is no dispute that the bread supplied by Subway in its heated sandwiches has a sugar content of 10% of the weight of the flour included in the dough, and thus exceeds the 2 per cent specified,'' the judgement read. The law makes a distinction between ''bread as a staple food, and other baked goods, which are, or approach, confectionery or fancy baked goods,'' the judgement said. Bookfinders was appealing a 2006 decision by authorities who refused to refund value-added tax payments. Lower courts had dismissed the case before it reached the Supreme Court.

Here is why an Irish court ruled Subway bread 'is not a bread'

subway-bread

Subway Bread, News on Subway Bread, stories on Subway Bread, articles on Subway Bread, Subway Bread stories at Wion, Subway Bread news, Subway Bread latest news

subway bread

Something's not fishy? Subway's tuna sandwich lawsuit is back

Our tuna is real: Subway dismisses media reports about key ingredient missing in sandwich

Where's the tuna? Investigation reveals important ingredient missing in Subway's sandwich

Here is why an Irish court ruled Subway bread 'is not a bread'