'Not fish': Shocking claims surrounding Subway's tuna sandwiches

Yahoo News Staff
·2-min read

Two women are suing Subway claiming the tuna used in the fast food chain’s sandwiches doesn’t contain fish.

The lawsuit, being pursued by Karen Dhanowa and Nilima Amin, from the US state of California, claims Subway isn’t using tuna in its tuna sandwiches and alleges fraud, The Washington Post reports.

Subway denies this and claims not only is it tuna but the fish is wild-caught “pure” tuna.

But Shalini Dogra, who’s representing the women, said the ingredient has been tested in a lab.

A Subway tuna sandwich is pictured.
A lawsuit claims Subway doesn't use real tuna in its sandwiches. Source: Subway (file pic)

“We found that the ingredients were not tuna and not fish,” she told the Post.

Ms Dogra would not say what the lab identified the ingredient as.

The lawsuit claims “multiple samples” were taken to the lab and the ingredient is “a mixture of various concoctions that do not constitute tuna, yet have been blended together by defendants to imitate the appearance of tuna”.

Katia Noll, senior director for global food safety and quality at Subway, told the Post the restaurants “receive pure tuna”.

American sandwich fast food restaurant franchise Subway store seen in Hong Kong.
Subway has denied the allegations claiming the tuna is caught locally. Source: Getty Images (file pic)

Subway in Ireland in October made headlines around the globe when a court ruled the bread used in its sandwiches didn’t meet the definition of “bread”.

According to the Irish Independent, the Value-Added Tax Act 1972 states sugar, fat, and "bread improver" cannot add up to more than two per cent of the weight of the flour.

Subway bread in Ireland has a sugar content of 10 per cent of the weight of the flour included in the dough.

Do you have a story tip? Email: newsroomau@yahoonews.com.

You can also follow us on Facebook, Instagram and Twitter and download the Yahoo News app from the App Store or Google Play.