Fi Dog Supplements Recall Expanded Over Salmonella Risk
The FDA announced an expanded recall of Fi dog supplements due to potential salmonella contamination.
2 reports on this incident · first at Sep 9, 2026, 6:02 a.m. ET
Earlier reports
Sep 9, 2026, 6:02 a.m. ETFirst report
Fi Dog Supplements Recalled Over Potential Salmonella Contamination
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced a recall of Fi Calming supplement for Dogs 180g and Fi 8-in-1 Formula supplement for Dogs 180g due to potential salmonella contamination, according to a report by Fox Business. The recall, reported on September 9, 2026, was issued because an ingredient supplied to the company's manufacturer may be contaminated with salmonella, which poses a health risk to both pets and people.
The affected products were distributed directly to consumers and through online retailers Amazon and Chewy. Consumers can identify the recalled supplements by lot numbers 26118 and 26159. The FDA advises consumers to stop using the products and throw them away.
The cause of the contamination has not been determined, but the recall is precautionary.
Was this report accurate and useful?
Sources
Revision history
- Version 19 Sept 2026, 10:12current
First published.
- Version 19 Sept 2026, 10:02current
First published.
How we work
This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.
Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.
Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.
None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.