And no bread, at least in Ireland:Subway tuna subs contain no tuna DNA
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/01/irish-court-rules-subway-bread-is-not-bread
And no bread, at least in Ireland:Subway tuna subs contain no tuna DNA
“Eat fresh” (whatever it is).Subway tuna subs contain no tuna DNA
If you had read the entire story, you would know that it was not proven whether or not there was tuna DNA in the subs.Subway tuna subs contain no tuna DNA
The Times (or its lab) failed to find any DNA, but inside edition did. It is tuna.If you had read the entire story, you would know that it was not proven whether or not there was tuna DNA in the subs.
The Times reporter sent it to the only lab he could find and they reported that they could find no DNA at all because the submitted samples had been denatured. The entire report should never have been published.The Times (or its lab) failed to find any DNA, but inside edition did. It is tuna.
“Warm” beer.
well ... it’s not actually warm, rather around 49 to 55 degrees Fahrenheit.
Not so sure about that exact number but this particular one was dissatisfying as well as not entertaining. The point of the project was to determine if there was any tuna in the product. The reporter failed to find a proper procedure, a suitable lab test or any useful results but, despite these failures, decided to finish the piece anyway and the NYTimes decided to publish it.My dear, dear friend; that holds true for roughly 99% of everything published nowadays! Jim
Pedantry incoming—and totally gratuitous detail—I'll beg forgiveness in advance. Also adding to Jim's post, not making him wrong.Yes, a tubular roll. It's a spiral viewed from the end. And when I say "marinated", I mean that the fish (in particular) is washed in salt brine, presumably to reduce transmission of disease. I did not eat sashimi in winter, but only in summer. That may have had something to do with it. Jim
Not so sure about that exact number but this particular one was dissatisfying as well as not entertaining. The point of the project was to determine if there was any tuna in the product. The reporter failed to find a proper procedure, a suitable lab test or any useful results but, despite these failures, decided to finish the piece anyway and the NYTimes decided to publish it.
Corvid cat-vomit cleanup—real tuna confirmed:ok, now I am "triggered" - several years ago a NY Times science reporter called me since I was the scientist who had worked on a particular project; I carefully explained to him the science & context, which he promptly screwed up in his published piece
a couple years later i was chatting in a local coffee shop with a former English teacher I knew casually and the topic of newspaper reporting came up - he insisted that the NYT was reliable since they had special "science reporters"
he didn't know that I was a scientist or about the article, and I decided not to crush his world and bring it up
ok, now I am "triggered" - several years ago a NY Times science reporter called me since I was the scientist who had worked on a particular project; I carefully explained to him the science & context, which he promptly screwed up in his published piece
a couple years later i was chatting in a local coffee shop with a former English teacher I knew casually and the topic of newspaper reporting came up - he insisted that the NYT was reliable since they had special "science reporters"
he didn't know that I was a scientist or about the article, and I decided not to crush his world and bring it up
ok, now I am "triggered" - several years ago a NY Times science reporter called me since I was the scientist who had worked on a particular project; I carefully explained to him the science & context, which he promptly screwed up in his published piece
a couple years later i was chatting in a local coffee shop with a former English teacher I knew casually and the topic of newspaper reporting came up - he insisted that the NYT was reliable since they had special "science reporters"
he didn't know that I was a scientist or about the article, and I decided not to crush his world and bring it up
When it comes to science, never trust a source that doesn't link to the original paper.ok, now I am "triggered" - several years ago a NY Times science reporter called me since I was the scientist who had worked on a particular project; I carefully explained to him the science & context, which he promptly screwed up in his published piece
a couple years later i was chatting in a local coffee shop with a former English teacher I knew casually and the topic of newspaper reporting came up - he insisted that the NYT was reliable since they had special "science reporters"
he didn't know that I was a scientist or about the article, and I decided not to crush his world and bring it up