You ever wonder what's really in that tuna sandwich you just scoffed down at one of Subway's number of Hudson Valley locations? A lot of people have. In fact, two woman even sued Subway in January, claiming the fast food chain didn't use any actual real tuna in their sandwiches. So, if it's not tuna, then what's really in there? 

The peculiar case has even attracted the attention of the New York Times, which set up a lab test using 60 inches of tuna sandwiches from three subway restaurants in the Los Angeles area. What did they discover? One spokesperson says either the tuna used is so processed that perhaps it couldn't be identified as tuna, or there's simply no tuna in those sandwiches. This contradicts an earlier test, set up Inside Edition, that used Subway sandwiches out of Queens at a lab in Florida. That test did detect real tuna.

What gives? Were the test subjects that were used labeled wrong? Perhaps it's some else, such as an unidentifiable species that's being served on all those buns and wraps? Subway has fought back, saying the clams are untrue and that there is "100 percent cooked tuna" in their product. Fox NY says the women who filed the suit with the U.S. District Court of the Northern District of California, allege the sandwich chain used a "a mixture of various concoctions" in their tuna sandwich and wraps that they serve. Fox says an attorney for the plaintiffs would not comment on what was really in those tests that were conducted. Perhaps for the best.

Will these findings make you rethink your next purchase at Subway? Had any weird experiences? Or are you perfectly content chowing down on your favorite mutant sea creature combo sub like you have for most of your life, and nothing's going to change that?

LOOK: Here are copycat recipes from 20 of the most popular fast food restaurants in America