Source: Youjeen Cho and Ethan Cull on Unsplash.
Ah, yes, just tuna and mayo.

After a California lawsuit alleged that Subway’s tuna sandwiches were devoid of tuna, a New York Times reporter sent samples to a lab and reportedly found no tuna DNA.

The lab says the results mean one of two things: “One, it’s so heavily processed that whatever we could pull out, we couldn’t make an identification. Or we got some and there’s just nothing there that’s tuna.”

Another study conducted by Inside Edition did find traces of tuna.

A notable difference between the two is that the New York Times sandwich samples came from Los Angeles Subway stores, while the Inside Edition sandwich samples came from stores in Queens, New York.

Former Subway Employees and Patrons Weigh In

In response to the lawsuit from January 2021, former Subway employees are testifying that the tuna is indeed tuna.


Many say that Subway tuna is exactly like the tuna from grocery stores.

Although the majority worked at Subway a while ago, current California employees and fish experts interviewed by the New York Times affirm that the tuna is probably real.

“I don’t think a sandwich place would intentionally mislabel,” Mr. Rudie from Catalina Offshore Products said. “They’re buying a can of tuna that says ‘tuna.’ If there’s any fraud in this case, it happened at the cannery.”

They also question why Subway would swap out its tuna, much like some Twitter users.

Others are pointing out that this is one problem in a long list of allegations against Subway.