Corrections.

When we publish something that is wrong, we fix it, we date the fix, and we write it down here. That includes the errors nobody else caught — most of the entries below came out of our own review process, and they are listed exactly the same way a reader-reported error would be. A correction log that only records the mistakes someone else noticed is not a correction log. Newest first.

August 19, 2026 — Manganese, wrong on two product pages in opposite directions

Writing up the question of whether Dasuquin and Cosequin can be given together meant adding up every ingredient a stacked dog would receive, and the addition did not reconcile with our own pages. Two errors, made independently, pointing opposite ways. Our Dasuquin with MSM page listed “manganese ascorbate” in its materials line. That tier does not contain manganese: read on dasuquin.com on August 19, the Dasuquin with MSM soft chew panel has eight rows — glucosamine, MSM, chondroitin, total omega-3s, EPA+DHA, ASU, Boswellia, green tea — with no manganese row and none in the other-ingredients list. Manganese is printed and quantified one tier up, in Dasuquin Advanced, at 1 mg per small/medium chew and 3 mg per large chew. And our Cosequin page said the linked MSM & HA tablet adds 3 mg of manganese over the classic Plus MSM tablet. It does not — both tablet lines carry the same 3 mg of manganese ascorbate, and hyaluronic acid is the only difference between them.

The practical effect of the first error was that anyone computing a stacked dose from our pages would have counted manganese twice. Both lines are fixed, both product pages now carry the correction in the body rather than only in a changelog, and the article that found it publishes the corrected arithmetic in full: a dog over 60 lb on Cosequin plus Dasuquin with MSM receives 9 mg of manganese a day at loading, all of it from the Cosequin. We do not know whether that number matters clinically in a dog — no regulator publishes an upper limit — and the article says so.

August 13, 2026 — Dasuquin was the product in the trial, and we had not said so

Our Dasuquin with MSM page said the evidence for the category is “strongest in the laboratory and weakest in blinded canine trials.” That was true as far as it went, and it left out the specific fact that matters most. Reading the full text of Kampa et al. 2023 rather than our own summary of it, the trial names its glucosamine arm outright: “DASUQUIN® with MSM Soft Chews, Nutramax Laboratories Consumer Care, Inc.” — the large-dog formula we link, at about 30 mg of glucosamine per kilogram daily. Its change in peak vertical force at week four was −0.05, against +0.08 on placebo, while two green-lipped mussel lipid extracts and carprofen all improved significantly. A second blinded trial by a different group, using activity monitors over 97 days in 60 dogs, reached the same answer.

Dasuquin is our second-best-earning recommendation, so to be explicit about what we have and have not concluded: the trial used 15 dogs per arm and was powered to detect the mussel extract's effect, not to exclude a smaller one, and it ran maintenance dosing through the four-to-six-week window Nutramax's own label says to double. Those are real defences and we have published them alongside the finding. What we have stopped doing is describing the product as well evidenced. Its score comes down from 9.2 to 8.8 — the product has not changed, our reading of it has. In the same pass we fixed a stale YuMOVE claim in our best-joint-supplements article, which still cited the unpublished UK trial we retired on August 12; the earlier pass corrected two other articles and missed that one.

August 14, 2026 — A harness claim reversed by the gait literature; a coat recommendation withdrawn

We had written, on our Easy Walk harness page and in our French Bulldog guide, that non-Y-front strap layouts sit across the shoulder “more than the best-fitting harnesses do.” The one published gait comparison found the opposite: Y-front designs restricted shoulder extension more than strap-over-shoulder designs (Lafuente et al., Veterinary Record2019;184(2):64). Both pages now state the reversal and cite the trial. The same pass corrected “five adjustment points” to the manufacturer's own figure of four, and renamed the page to the Deluxe variant the listing actually sells.

Our Gentle Leader page said the head collar “includes a training DVD” (the current listing ships none) and was “developed by a board-certified veterinary behaviorist” — a rank we could not verify, so we now print what is checkable instead: R.K. Anderson's 1980s head-collar patents. Its score fell from 8.4 to 7.8. Our training-methods guide repeated the board-certified line and two defaults (“the harness most R+ trainers reach for,” a claimed KPA/CCPDT curriculum standard) that no survey substantiates; all are removed, and a long-line “whiplash risk” warning is now labeled what it is — a commonsense caution with no published injury data either way.

The Back on Track mesh coat is no longer recommended at all. We had recommended it on “anecdotal results from rehab vets,” which is not a source. There is no controlled canine evidence for the far-infrared mechanism, the one live listing ships in six to seven months from another continent, and the maker's current 1,690-variant catalog no longer contains the product. The page stays up as a dated record of the mistake, scored accordingly.

Two smaller ones, same day. Our ZIWI Peak page called full-feeding “comparable to fresh-cooked subscriptions”; at the maker's published 4,900 kcal/kg and the verified $52.76/kg price, a 70 lb dog costs about $16 a day — above most subscriptions, and the page now shows the arithmetic. And a morning hedge about the Solvit ramp resolved the same afternoon: we wrote that petsafe.com returned 404 on every URL we tried — the site is live (our URLs were wrong), the 400 lb rating is re-verified on the maker's Canadian page, and we learned the standard model has quietly left PetSafe's US catalog, which the product page now discloses.

And two from the same day's gear pass. Our Walkin' rear-support harness page (score now 6.8, from 7.9) had recommended it for degenerative myelopathy; the maker's own catalog no longer sells the harness as of 14 August 2026, and for a progressive disease the maker itself points buyers to its front-companion system — our page now says both. Our Comfy Cone page said the liner was washable; All Four Paws' own product page sells disposableliners and the care instruction is “wipe clean” — corrected here and, earlier, in our TPLO recovery guide.

August 14, 2026 — Invented testing and a fabricated journal name, removed

A citation-repair pass over our oldest pages found our flagship bed guide saying the Big Barker pilot study was “published in The Canine Health Foundation.” It was not published in any journal; it is a manufacturer-hosted study report, and our page now links the primary PDF directly with the design caveats we apply everywhere else (open-label, single-arm, owner-scored). The same pass removed an unsourced claim that a good bed “pays back in fewer vet visits and less NSAID use,” an invented foam-density shopping rule, and a “consulted two veterinary orthopedists” line we could not substantiate.

Separately, our PupRug page claimed testing “under three Labradors and a Pyrenees mix.” That testing did not happen — the same defect we removed from our Dasuquin page on August 7 — and the sentence is gone. The page had also misstated the product in both directions: it said spot-clean-only when the maker's own care copy says the cover machine-washes, and it said “1 year” where the maker advertises a lifetime no-flat guarantee — which we now note carries no measurable threshold at all. A foam-depth spec we printed appears nowhere the product is sold and has been removed. Our PetFusion warranty line said three years; the live listing says 24 months.

August 13, 2026 — Furhaven core prices; the Big Barker “Amazon markup” retired

We had written that Furhaven sells replacement foam cores at “$13.99 in every size.” That is the Small's price. The cores are priced by size — $13.99 Small up to $69.99 Giant, $25.99 for the Large most readers of these pages would buy — and the error came from reading a “from” price on the parts page instead of the per-variant feed. It appeared in four articles, the product page and our internal planning documents; all are corrected, and the ownership arithmetic survives with the right numbers (a Large plus a core every 18 months still runs about $26 a year).

Separately, we retired one of our own most-repeated findings. We had reported Big Barker's Amazon listing running about $40 above the manufacturer's own site. Checked like-for-like on 13 August, the edition Amazon sells (Headrest, Large) costs $289.95 in both places — our comparison had been putting Amazon's Headrest price against the direct site's cheaper Sleek edition. The accurate version of the finding, as of that morning: the $249.95 Sleek edition was not sold on Amazon, so buying direct still saved money via edition choice. By the same evening a Sleek-priced flat Large had appeared on Amazon at the identical $249.95 — rebrand-era listings churn daily — so the durable version is simpler still: the channels match on price, and the 180-night trial only comes with a direct purchase. Corrected wherever we said it, including the summary file we publish for AI assistants, both times.

August 12, 2026 — ASU evidence overstated; an unverifiable YuMOVE trial claim

Our Dasuquin-versus-Cosequin comparison said ASU “has its own supporting trials for protecting cartilage” — in three places, including an FAQ answer that feeds the structured data assistants read. That overstated the evidence, and it contradicted our own Dasuquin product page, which had carried the more defensible line since August 7. The strongest ASU work is laboratory and animal-model evidence; the one randomized double-blind canine trial we can name tested ASU only inside a combination product with fish oil, so it cannot isolate ASU's contribution. All three sites now say that, with the trial cited by DOI.

In the same pass we stopped repeating YuMOVE's “independent UK clinical trial” claim, which appeared on our product page and in two articles. The study it refers to is unpublished and the college unnamed — nothing is indexed on Europe PMC — so it cannot be checked by us or by you. We also found the manufacturer's own dosing page (three chews a day for a 70-pound dog, about $426 a year) disagreeing with its Amazon listing (“just one chew a day”) by a factor of three, and a sentence on our page claiming palatability testing we never did. The product's score came down from 8.4 to 7.9 for the disclosure gaps; the price range and the money-back guarantee's real conditions (six weeks of use, then a 30-day claim window) are now stated.

August 11, 2026 — Misattributed journal in a neutering citation

Our guide on when to spay or neuter cited the Golden Retriever Lifetime Study gonadectomy analysis to the Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, with an approximate title and a vague “2019–2024 publication series” date. The paper is Simpson M, Albright S, Wolfe B, Searfoss E, Street K, Diehl K, Page R, “Age at gonadectomy and risk of overweight/obesity and orthopedic injury in a cohort of Golden Retrievers,” published in PLOS ONE in 2019, 14(7):e0209131. The finding we drew from it was correct; the reference pointing at it was not, which meant a reader trying to check us would have gone looking in the wrong journal.

Found while researching a new breed page, and worth saying how: a citation that is slightly wrong is harder to catch than one that is invented, because it survives every check except actually resolving it. We now verify references against the DOI record rather than against the shape of a plausible citation.

August 10, 2026 — Zesty Paws ingredients

We described Zesty Paws Mobility Bites as adding turmeric and hyaluronic acid to a glucosamine, chondroitin and MSM base. It contains neither. The product discloses a single 1,510 mg “Proprietary Hip & Joint Blend” holding four ingredients — glucosamine HCl from shellfish, OptiMSM, chondroitin sulfate and vitamin E. We had been crediting it with two ingredients it does not have, in a product page and in an article comparing it against Dasuquin, where the claim also sat inside the structured data that search engines and assistants read. Both are corrected.

Checking it turned up two things worth more than the original claim. Because the actives sit inside a proprietary blend, the glucosamine and chondroitin amounts are not published at all, so no one can check them against a studied dose — and the one active that does carry a number is contradicted by its own maker, with zestypaws.com stating 500 mg of OptiMSM per two chews and the Zesty Paws Amazon listing stating 400 mg, both read on the same day. We publish the disagreement rather than picking one. We also had the price stale: $32.97 verified, not the ~$37 we listed, which at the label serving works out to about $267 a year for a 70-pound dog — more than Dasuquin with MSM at maintenance, so our framing of this as the cheaper alternative was backwards.

August 10, 2026 — Unsupported satisfaction guarantees

Our Dasuquin and Zesty Paws pages both carried “Manufacturer satisfaction guarantee” in the warranty field. Neither was substantiated, and the Dasuquin one is close to the opposite of the truth. Nutramax's published policy asks you to report within 10 business days of receipt, and between 10 and 30 business days accepts a return only if the product is unopened, unmarked, undamaged and has a year left before expiry. The label prescribes a 4–6 week loading phase — so you cannot run the trial the product asks for and still be able to send it back. That is now stated on the page. For Zesty Paws we could not verify any guarantee, so we no longer claim one. This is the same defect we fixed on Cosequin earlier the same day and did not carry across at the time.

August 8, 2026 — Welactin dosing

We described Welactin as a pump bottle delivering 200 mg EPA and 130 mg DHA per pump. Current bottles are not dosed that way: they use a 6 mL scoop delivering 1,610 mg of total omega-3 fatty acids, of which 1,330 mg is EPA and DHA. Every number we had built on the old figure was therefore wrong, including how long a bottle lasts — roughly seven weeks for a 60-pound dog, not the month we had published. We corrected the product page and five articles, and reworked the arithmetic in each rather than only swapping the numbers. In the same pass we removed a claim that the product is third-party tested for heavy metals, which we could not verify, and a refrigeration instruction that does not appear on the manufacturer's label.

August 7, 2026 — Dasuquin

We had published a sentence saying we used Dasuquin on a test dog after TPLO surgery. That testing did not happen, and the sentence is gone. We also overstated the evidence: we wrote that ASU is clinically shown to slow cartilage degradation, when the support for it comes from laboratory and animal-model work, and that is how the page now reads. An unsourced claim that it is the most researched joint supplement has been removed. The score came down from 9.4 to 9.2.

August 6, 2026 — GingerLead pricing

We described the GingerLead sling as costing half what the Help 'Em Up harness costs. It does not. At $69.95 against $80 direct, the gap is about $10, and framing it as half price changed the decision we were asking readers to make. Corrected in five articles. While rechecking the sling we also found drawbacks we had never disclosed, and its score came down from 8.7 to 8.3.

August 5, 2026 — Help 'Em Up pricing

Our pages implied a single price across all configurations of the Help 'Em Up harness. The Mix & Match option — the configuration we specifically recommend for dogs with wasted hindquarters — costs $15 more, and we had never said so. Readers following our recommendation were budgeting from a price that did not apply to them. The premium is now disclosed wherever we make that recommendation. We also added a note that the Amazon buy box for this harness is held by a third-party reseller rather than the brand.

August 5, 2026 — K9 Ballistics bed guarantee

We wrote about the Tough Ripstop line in a way that implied its 120-day guarantee covers the whole bed against chewing. It covers the cover only. For a determined chewer, the Chew Proof Armored line is the one to buy, and the pages now say that. The score came down from 8.7 to 8.4. The same recheck turned up something in the brand's favor that we had missed and have now published: a 10-year warranty against the bed flattening.

August 3, 2026 — Misattributed research finding

A draft attributed force-plate correlations to the Helsinki Chronic Pain Index when those correlations belong to the CBPI questionnaire. The Helsinki figure was 0.128 and not statistically significant — close to the opposite of what the draft claimed. Our pre-publication review caught it and it never went live. We are listing it here anyway, because the review gate is part of what readers are trusting when they trust a number on this site, and a log that hides its near-misses tells you less about how careful we are than one that shows them.

July 30, 2026 — Pet Gear ramp weight capacity

Amazon carries multiple listings for the same Pet Gear ramp with weight specs that contradict each other. We had picked one and repeated it as fact. We now publish the disagreement itself and tell readers to check the capacity on the listing they are actually buying from — for a ramp holding an unsteady dog, that number has to be right for the unit in the box. We found the same pattern on Carhartt coat size charts on August 7 and handled it the same way.

Found something wrong?

Tell us. If you spot an error on any page, write to us through the contact page and point us at it — we would rather be corrected than be quoted wrongly for years. Corrections reported by readers are credited here by name when the reader is happy for us to do that.