A small randomized double-blind placebo-controlled canine trial reported improvements in fear/anxiety scores and urinary cortisol measures with a standardized ashwagandha root extract. That is genuine dog-specific clinical evidence, but it comes from a single 24-dog study of one named extract.

The evidence is therefore promising but insufficient for a broad claim that ashwagandha supplements calm dogs.

Key takeaways

What was actually studied?

The trial lasted four weeks and enrolled 24 client-owned dogs, randomized 12 per group.

Dogs received placebo or 15 mg/kg body weight of KSM-66 ashwagandha root extract once daily.

Outcomes included:

The intervention was well tolerated in the study.

What did the study find?

Compared with placebo, the ashwagandha group showed a statistically significant reduction in urinary cortisol-to-creatinine ratio and improvement in a fear/anxiety behavioral domain.

These findings are encouraging because the study included both behavioral and physiological measures.

But the study remains exploratory:

Why extract identity matters

Botanical evidence is extract-specific.

KSM-66 is a defined root extract. Evidence for that preparation cannot be generalized automatically to:

For Dog Supplement Facts interpretation:

one ashwagandha extract ≠ all ashwagandha products

Cortisol is not the same as behavior

The urinary cortisol result is supportive, but physiological stress markers and observed behavior are different endpoints.

A product should not be called clinically calming solely because it changes cortisol.

Dog Supplement Facts evidence status

INSUFFICIENT — PROMISING, EXTRACT-SPECIFIC EVIDENCE

The positive randomized trial justifies interest and further research, but not a broad efficacy claim.

What the evidence does not prove

References

  1. Kaur J, Seshadri S, Golla KH, Sampara P. Efficacy and safety of standardized Ashwagandha (Withania somnifera) root extract on reducing stress and anxiety in domestic dogs: a randomized controlled trial. Journal of Veterinary Behavior. 2022;51:8–15. doi:10.1016/j.jveb.2022.03.002.