Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

DNA tests show Subway sandwiches could contain just 50% chicken

cbc.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 252 posts

Re: DNA tests show Subway sandwiches could contain just 50% chicken

#151

Post by throwaway2048 »

refurb wrote: post #142
DrScump wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Read up on what "mechanically separated" poultry/pork actually is , and you may never eat it again. I don't.

mechanically separate meat is a paste-like meat product produced by forcing pureed or ground beef, pork, turkey or chicken, under high pressure through a sieve or similar device to separate the bone from the edible meat tissue .[1] What is unappealing about that? It's still meat, just finely ground. And if you're keen on not wasting meat, it's a great way to get the last bit of meat off a carcass. [1] https://en.wiki…

they feed whole chicken carcasses through grinders and strain out the bone/feather/etc fragments.

Re: DNA tests show Subway sandwiches could contain just 50% chicken

#152

Post by alanfalcon »

Cyph0n wrote: post #56
samb1729 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In this case is a sandwich an imperial unit?

Since it's Subway, yes, because they use the 6in/12in measurement in their stores worldwide AFAIK.

For a while there, Subway claimed that "footlong" "was just a word" and not an exact measurement (and often a footlong measued less than 12").

Re: DNA tests show Subway sandwiches could contain just 50% chicken

#153

Post by uzoodoo »

dragonwriter wrote: post #140
karthikb wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most food labeling in the US is done this way. Gross measures (total volume, weight, etc) are in imperial while the nutrition facts are in metric. So milk will say, serving size 12 Oz, protein XX g.

> Most food labeling in the US is done this way. Gross measures (total volume, weight, etc) are in imperial while the nutrition facts are in metric. So milk will say, serving size 12 Oz, protein XX g. Both net contents and serving size include metric measures. "Food labels printed must show the net contents in both metric (grams, kilograms, milliliters, liters) and U.S. Customary System (ounces, pounds, fluid ounces)…

Except the metric serving sizes are very inconvenient unless you like to do long division in your head.

For example, I have two yogurts, one has 18g carbs per 170g serving, the other has 34 g per 227g serving. Quick, how much more carbs would I have if I ate the same amount?

It's a lot easier to tell if you know one is 6oz and the other is 8oz, or if the servings were designed in metric sizes (e.g. 150g and 200g).

Re: DNA tests show Subway sandwiches could contain just 50% chicken

#154

Post by Apocryphon »

chrisseaton wrote: post #9
jacquesc wrote: post #3

As someone who eats these fake chicken sandwiches occasionally, cant say I'm surprised. I always assumed these things were the equivalent of chicken hot dog patties or something. Don't know why people eat these things... oh ya -- it's the only food place open in SF SOMA late night.

> it's the only food place open in SF SOMA late night Wow that surprises me. I would have though SOMA would have been one of the best places in the world for people with disposable income leaving startups late and wanting to buy food on the way home.

Despite its status as a booming economic center, S.F. still strangely does not have a lot of businesses open late at night.

Re: DNA tests show Subway sandwiches could contain just 50% chicken

#155

Post by lloydde »

alanfalcon wrote: post #152
Cyph0n wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since it's Subway, yes, because they use the 6in/12in measurement in their stores worldwide AFAIK.

For a while there, Subway claimed that "footlong" "was just a word" and not an exact measurement (and often a footlong measued less than 12").

'As part of the settlement, Subway agreed to institute practices for at least four years to ensure its bread is at least 12 inches long. The judge approved $520,000 in attorney fees and $500 for each of the 10 individuals who were representatives of the class, but no monetary claims were awarded to potential members of the class.

"It was difficult to prove monetary damages, because everybody ate the evidence," said Thomas Zimmerman, who was co-lead attorney for the class. Zimmerman said the attorney fees are being split among 10 law firms.'

Feb. 29, 2016

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/9dda14e5aeae4083aa331ebbd98af...

Re: DNA tests show Subway sandwiches could contain just 50% chicken

#156

Post by paulddraper »

curun1r wrote: post #37
TheCoreh wrote: post #4

> The majority of the remaining DNA? Soy. The headline got me sorta terrified, imagining what sort of repugnant, monstrous creature was being grinded and mixed into my Subway sandwich. Good to know at least it's just soy.

Yeah...I don't see too much to be outraged about here. If you want to be upset about adding soy to the chicken you eat, be upset about the soy they add to the chicken before they kill it. Soy isn't part of the natural diet for chickens, so feeding it to them means also feeding them antibiotics. If anything, lowering the percentage of chicken that's raised in that way would make it healthier.

By that logic, you'd be okay with steaks that are 50% beef and 50% corn.

Or even better, 50% beef and 50% grass.

Re: DNA tests show Subway sandwiches could contain just 50% chicken

#157

Post by vonmoltke »

maxerickson wrote: post #150
vonmoltke wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Typically it has a significant amount of sugar (like, considerably more sugar than salt, 1 gram or more per slice). Contrary to graycat's ingredient list, sugar is a key ingredient of nearly every leavened bread recipe. About 40g/loaf is the typical amount (about three tablespoons). I would be very surprised if you could find a bread recipe that doesn't have about that much sugar, unless it is specifically trying t…

I make bread with 10 grams or less of sugar all the time (usually pizza crust where I'm headed towards 0 grams being the standard). Also, there are breads in the stores I shop that don't list sugar (or the various substitutes for sucrose) as an ingredient.

> I make bread with 10 grams or less of sugar all the time (usually pizza crust where I'm headed towards 0 grams being the standard).

Pizza crust is a different recipe from the breads being discussed here. Sugar is not as necessary for the baking process as it is for soft bread.

> Also, there are breads in the stores I shop that don't list sugar (or the various substitutes for sucrose) as an ingredient.

I would like to see the brands. I have never seen a soft bread that did not contain sugar.

Re: DNA tests show Subway sandwiches could contain just 50% chicken

#158

Post by maxerickson »

vonmoltke wrote: post #157
maxerickson wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I make bread with 10 grams or less of sugar all the time (usually pizza crust where I'm headed towards 0 grams being the standard). Also, there are breads in the stores I shop that don't list sugar (or the various substitutes for sucrose) as an ingredient.

> I make bread with 10 grams or less of sugar all the time (usually pizza crust where I'm headed towards 0 grams being the standard). Pizza crust is a different recipe from the breads being discussed here. Sugar is not as necessary for the baking process as it is for soft bread. > Also, there are breads in the stores I shop that don't list sugar (or the various substitutes for sucrose) as an ingredient. I would like…

Pizza crust is a "leavened bread", full stop.

Also, the point stands that I make bread with minimal or no sugar in it. I just don't make it all that often.

As far as the bread in the stores, it's usually in the bakery section. I think Walmart's sourdough doesn't have much sugar in it, but they stock it in the bread aisle. Brand is Sam's choice. (does soft sourdough bread count in the soft bread category we are now discussing?).

Re: DNA tests show Subway sandwiches could contain just 50% chicken

#160

Post by GordonS »

uzoodoo wrote: post #153
dragonwriter wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Most food labeling in the US is done this way. Gross measures (total volume, weight, etc) are in imperial while the nutrition facts are in metric. So milk will say, serving size 12 Oz, protein XX g. Both net contents and serving size include metric measures. "Food labels printed must show the net contents in both metric (grams, kilograms, milliliters, liters) and U.S. Customary System (ounces, pounds, fluid ounces)…

Except the metric serving sizes are very inconvenient unless you like to do long division in your head. For example, I have two yogurts, one has 18g carbs per 170g serving, the other has 34 g per 227g serving. Quick, how much more carbs would I have if I ate the same amount? It's a lot easier to tell if you know one is 6oz and the other is 8oz, or if the servings were designed in metric sizes (e.g. 150g and 200g).

At least in the UK and Europe, nutritional information is also always included per 100g - so it's easy to compare
Post reply on HN