A page that ranks for DSIP dosage tells the reader how many units of an insulin syringe to draw from a five milligram vial, when to inject it under the skin, and how many nights to repeat. It prints three PubMed identifiers to prove the protocol has research behind it. We opened all three on 26 October 2026. The first resolves to a 1977 paper on alcohol dehydrogenase in human liver. The second resolves to a 1983 study of somatomedin inhibitors in diabetic rats. The third resolves to a 1986 trial of interferon against chemotherapy in multiple myeloma. None of the three mentions delta sleep-inducing peptide anywhere in the record. The pages are not named here on purpose. The finding is about the identifiers, and naming a storefront would only send it traffic.
There is no verified DSIP dosage. No DSIP product holds FDA approval, the federal trial registry lists no study of the peptide under either of its names, and the human sleep trials that exist gave it by intravenous infusion at 25 nanomoles per kilogram inside a sleep laboratory.
The peptide is real. The record is thin, old, and smaller than the charts suggest, and we cite all of it below. The federal entries for the molecule, under its INN, are collected on our emideltide (DSIP) compound page.
DSIP Dosage Sits on a Page FDA Rewrote
FDA names this molecule emideltide, the international nonproprietary name, and keeps it on the page titled “Certain Bulk Drug Substances for Use in Compounding that May Present Significant Safety Risks,” content current as of 22 April 2026. The row reads:
“Compounded drugs containing emideltide may pose risk for immunogenicity for certain routes of administration and may have complexities with regard to peptide-related impurities and API characterization. FDA has not identified safety-related information regarding emideltide for the proposed route of administration. Therefore, the agency lacks sufficient information to know whether the drug would cause harm if administered to humans.”
The agency is not describing a risk it measured. It is telling you it has no safety information to measure.
There is a second detail that sellers leave out. Emideltide sits in the lower table on that page, headed “Bulk drug substances nominated but withdrawn,” described as substances previously in category 2 of the interim policies whose nominations the nominators pulled. FDA flagged the molecule. The safety paragraph stayed behind. A withdrawal is not a clearance, and anyone who tells you FDA cleared DSIP should show you the sentence that says so.
The federal label database agrees. We searched DailyMed for the peptide on 23 October 2026 and got zero listings, and the database records its data as current on that date. No manufacturer has taken a DSIP product through approval, so there is no label and no studied dose on a package insert.
The trial registry is as empty. A search of ClinicalTrials.gov on 26 October 2026 for “delta sleep-inducing peptide” returned zero studies, and a search for “emideltide” returned zero. The same interface returned 818 studies for semaglutide that day, so the zero is a real zero and not a broken query.
DSIP Dosage Versus the Five Sleep Trials That Exist
The human sleep work on this peptide runs from 1981 to 1992 and it is small. Five studies, and each one used an intravenous line under laboratory supervision.
The first came from Basel in 1981, in the International Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, Therapy and Toxicology, volume 19, pages 341 to 345. Six healthy volunteers took 25 nanomoles per kilogram by slow infusion in the morning, double-blind and crossover. Total sleep time rose 59 percent within a 130 minute window against placebo, and the authors noted that behavioral and EEG analysis showed no sedation in the classic drug sense.
A second 1981 paper, in Experientia, volume 37, pages 913 to 917, moved to six middle-aged chronic insomniacs at the same dose. Sleep lasted longer, quality improved, interruptions fell, and the authors recorded no daytime sedation and no other side effects. Their most useful line is a timing detail: the sleep-promoting effect showed up in the second hour after injection, while the first hour looked mildly arousing.
The largest of the set appeared in European Neurology in 1987, volume 27, pages 120 to 129. Fourteen middle-aged chronic insomniacs, seven consecutive nights, placebo-controlled and double-blind, with polysomnography at baseline, at the start of treatment, at the end and on a placebo night after. Night sleep improved, and daytime alertness and performance rose.
Two later papers cut the other way. Monti and colleagues, in the International Journal of Clinical Pharmacology Research, volume 7, pages 105 to 110, ran four nights against placebo in a double-blind crossover and found that differences against placebo were significant only in the same direction as differences that already existed at baseline. Their conclusion: sleep improvement under DSIP treatment is of little clinical significance.
Bes and colleagues in Neuropsychobiology, 1992, volume 26, pages 193 to 197, took 16 chronic insomniacs through five laboratory nights in a double-blind matched-pairs design. Objective sleep quality did favor DSIP, and one tiredness measure moved. The authors then wrote that those effects were weak and could come in part from an incidental change in the placebo group, and concluded that short term treatment of chronic insomnia with DSIP is not likely to be of major therapeutic benefit.
Five studies. Four of them report their size, and those four add up to 42 people. No trial ran longer than a week. The strongest positive result came from six volunteers, and the two most tightly controlled studies landed on statistical significance rather than practical significance.
DSIP Dosage and the Route No Sleep Trial Tested
The charts sell a subcutaneous bedtime injection. We looked for a human sleep study using that route and did not find one.
A PubMed search on 26 October 2026 for the peptide combined with subcutaneous, intramuscular, intranasal or oral dosing returned eleven records. The subcutaneous sleep work in that set is feline and rodent. Susić, in Physiology and Behavior, 1987, volume 40, pages 569 to 572, injected eight cats subcutaneously at 120 nanomoles per kilogram and reported a significant rise in deep slow-wave sleep, while the waking time and latency differences failed significance.
One human study did leave the intravenous route. Hruz and colleagues published in the Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology in December 2001, volume 21, pages 626 to 628, on intranasal administration. Their outcome measure was P300, an EEG response to a stimulus, and they reported an increase. Sleep duration, sleep efficiency and next-day function went unmeasured.
So the product in the charts, a small subcutaneous dose taken at bedtime, rests on no human sleep trial we could locate. The trial route was intravenous and weight-based, given in a lab, and the animal work used 120 nanomoles per kilogram, which is not the number on any chart we read.
The Cortisol and Growth Hormone Claims the Charts Also Sell
Vendors describe DSIP as a cortisol regulator and a growth hormone releaser. The human endocrine studies do not support either description.
Giusti and colleagues, in Psychoneuroendocrinology, 1993, volume 18, pages 79 to 84, gave 25 micrograms per kilogram intravenously to eight healthy women and found no change in growth hormone or prolactin, spontaneous or arginine-stimulated. They noted in passing that they used dosages known to modify ECG patterns, so the peptide did have measurable cardiac effects at those exposures.
Späth-Schwalbe and colleagues, same journal, 1995, volume 20, pages 231 to 237, infused 3 and 4 milligram total doses into healthy young men and found ACTH and cortisol responses almost identical to placebo, both after corticotropin-releasing hormone stimulation and after a meal. Their conclusion: the data do not support an inhibitory role for DSIP on ACTH and cortisol secretion in man.
Two earlier studies found partial movement the other way. Bjartell and colleagues, same journal, 1989, volume 14, pages 347 to 355, saw ACTH-like immunoreactivity fall for three hours while plasma cortisol stayed on its normal daily decline. Chiodera and colleagues, Hormone Research, 1994, volume 42, pages 267 to 272, saw basal ACTH fall while vasopressin did not respond.
A pituitary signal may move. The hormone the clinics talk about, cortisol, does not, in the two studies designed to test it.
What to Ask Before You Accept a DSIP Dosage
Three questions, in this order.
Which paper is behind this protocol? Ask for a PubMed identifier and open it. If it resolves to alcohol dehydrogenase, you have your answer.
Which route and which population were studied? Here the answer is intravenous, laboratory, and between six and sixteen people per trial, mostly middle-aged insomniacs. A subcutaneous bedtime injection in a healthy adult is a different experiment.
Who is prescribing, and which pharmacy made the vial? Doses vary by preparation and by person, the only party who should set one is a licensed prescriber holding your history, and compounding rules run at the state level as well as the federal one. Our checklist for that conversation is at How to Check a Peptide Clinic Before Booking. Our clinic directory is where to use it.
This article gives no dosing guidance. The wider map of which peptides carry which federal risk language is at Peptides Side Effects: What FDA Has Published, the closest case of dosage articles outrunning human data is at MOTS-c Dosage: Zero Milligrams, and the sleep and growth hormone claims around the neighboring peptides are covered at Sermorelin Side Effects: The Label That Left the Shelf.
Frequently asked questions
Is there a standard DSIP dosage?
No. No approved DSIP product exists, so no label sets a dose, and the human sleep trials used one weight-based intravenous dose of 25 nanomoles per kilogram in a laboratory. The subcutaneous microgram protocols sold online sit on no human sleep trial we could locate.
Is DSIP FDA approved?
No. DailyMed returned zero DSIP listings on 23 October 2026. FDA’s compounding page carries the molecule as emideltide and states that the agency has not identified safety-related information for the proposed route of administration.
What did the human trials actually find?
Two trials reported better sleep in small groups of insomniacs, one in 14 people over seven nights and one in six people. Two later and more tightly controlled trials found effects too weak to count.
Does DSIP lower cortisol?
The two studies built to answer that found no effect. A 1995 infusion study in healthy men found ACTH and cortisol responses to corticotropin-releasing hormone and to a meal almost identical to placebo, and a 1993 study in eight healthy women found no change in growth hormone or prolactin either.
Has anyone tested DSIP as a subcutaneous injection in humans?
We found no human sleep trial using that route. The subcutaneous sleep studies in the literature are in cats and rats, and the one human study using a non-injected route measured an EEG response to a stimulus rather than sleep.
Why do dosage charts print PubMed numbers that do not match?
The three identifiers on the pages we opened on 26 October 2026 resolve to papers about alcohol dehydrogenase, somatomedin inhibitors in diabetic rats and interferon in multiple myeloma. A citation that resolves to the wrong paper is not a citation.
Sources: FDA, Certain Bulk Drug Substances for Use in Compounding that May Present Significant Safety Risks, content current as of 22 April 2026, accessed 26 October 2026. Monnier M et al., Experientia, April 1977;33(4):548-552, the original and synthetic nonapeptide comparison. Schneider-Helmert D et al., International Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, Therapy and Toxicology, August 1981;19(8):341-345. Schneider-Helmert D and Schoenenberger GA, Experientia, 1981;37(9):913-917. Schneider-Helmert D, European Neurology, 1987;27(2):120-129. Monti JM et al., International Journal of Clinical Pharmacology Research, 1987;7(2):105-110. Bes FW et al., Neuropsychobiology, 1992;26(4):193-197. Susić V, Physiology and Behavior, 1987;40(5):569-572. Hruz P et al., Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology, December 2001;21(6):626-628. Giusti M et al., Psychoneuroendocrinology, 1993;18(1):79-84. Späth-Schwalbe E et al., Psychoneuroendocrinology, 1995;20(3):231-237. Bjartell A et al., Psychoneuroendocrinology, 1989;14(5):347-355. Chiodera P et al., Hormone Research, 1994;42(6):267-272. DailyMed, SPL search for delta sleep inducing peptide, database published 23 October 2026, zero results. ClinicalTrials.gov, study search for delta sleep-inducing peptide, queried 26 October 2026, zero results.
This article is general information for people comparing peptide clinics. It is not medical advice, it is not a recommendation for or against any product, and it contains no dosing guidance. Compounded preparations are not FDA-approved drugs, and a vial sold online is not the product used in the trials cited above. Talk to a licensed prescriber about your own history before starting, stopping or changing anything.