Synanthropes are known for their remarkable adaptability to coexist with humans, yet increased visibility exposes them to significant threats, such as hunting or conflict over resources. Moore et al.'s review 'The rise of hyperabundant native generalists threatens both humans and nature' (https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12985) explores distribution patterns and impacts of macaques and pigs in anthropogenic environments. Our critical evaluation of this study revealed several substantial issues: the pooling of data from species that are ecologically and behaviourally distinct, an error in data acquisition, potential biases in statistical analyses, and critical misrepresentations of threats to and from wildlife in human-impacted habitats. Additionally, we highlight the lack of evidence supporting the authors' core assertion of hyperabundance of the study species. While Moore et al. compare species densities and abundance across various habitat types, their analyses did not demonstrate population increases over time. On the contrary, our re-analysis of their data sets showed a decreasing population trend in Macaca nemestrina and the absence of M. fascicularis from 44% of surveyed habitats characterized by medium to high forest integrity. Further, our findings emphasize the importance of intact forests for predicting a high relative abundance of macaques and pigs. Overall, we recommend a more careful interpretation of the data, as misrepresentations of abundance data can result in negative or sensational discourses about overabundance, which may threaten the conservation of species that often thrive in anthropogenic landscapes.