Is the tuna at Subway not really tuna?

A new lawsuit alleges that Subway is passing “a mixture of various concoctions” as tuna. Come again? Is it true that Subway’s tuna is not really tuna? Let’s investigate (or try to, anyway).

According to The Washington Post, there’s a controversy surrounding the tuna at Subway restaurants. What’s the controversy? We hope you are sitting down, because the tuna may not be tuna at all. Well, allegedly.

From the source, we know that the fast food restaurant describes its tuna sandwiches as “flaked tuna blended with creamy mayo then topped with your choice of crisp, fresh veggies.” Now, if you ask me, that sounds delicious. In fact, I could go for a tuna sandwich right now.

Not so fast, though, this new story is turning heads (and taste buds). A recently filed lawsuit is calling this sandwich out for not actually including “real tuna.” The lawsuit is coming from a U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

Is the tuna at Subway not real tuna?

The fast food chain begs to differ! They claim that this is a ridiculous suit and that their tuna is “wild-caught” and absolutely real. The lawsuit claims that the tuna subs are “made from anything but tuna” and they say they have the lab tests of “multiple samples” to prove it!

You have to wonder about this lawsuit, because the claim states that these samples were taken from various Subway locations in California, not just one and not only one time.

"As the source shares, an attorney claims that “we found that the ingredients were not tuna and not fish,”"

Who is to be believed? Subway is not backing down and is reportedly ready to fight these and other claims against one of its most popular sandwiches.

This isn’t the first time  Subway lands into some sort of trouble. Others have come after its “fresh bread,” too.

What do you think about this case? Which sandwich at Subway is your favorite?