DSIP

What is DSIP, and where did it come from?

The Schoenenberger–Monnier group in Basel, Switzerland, described in 1977, as a nine-amino-acid peptide, a substance obtained from rabbit cerebral venous blood and initially regarded as a candidate sleep factor: Trp-Ala-Gly-Gly-Asp-Ala-Ser-Gly-Glu. ^[2] The peptide and eight analogs were synthesized and given into the brain ventricles of rabbits under double-blind conditions; in the experiment evaluating a total of 58 rabbits, only synthetic DSIP produced a significant and specific increase in the delta and spindle waves characteristic of deep sleep. ^[1] The peptide’s international name is emideltide. ^[8]

The guide covering sleep regulation and sleep hormones such as melatonin can be read separately.

Is DSIP really a sleep peptide?

According to a 2006 review by researchers from the Russian Academy of Sciences, the link between DSIP and sleep could not be clarified further after the initial discovery; one reason is that the gene encoding DSIP, the precursor protein, and the possible receptor could never be isolated. The review characterizes the hypothesis that DSIP is a sleep factor as extremely poorly documented and still weak; it also notes that DSIP’s structure resembles no known peptide family. ^[2]

The same authors report that in their own early experiments in rabbits and rats, it was not DSIP itself but some artificial analogs that increased slow-wave sleep. They therefore propose the existence of another peptide in the body that gives a DSIP-like immunostaining reaction and may be responsible for the actual effect. ^[2] This means that the “natural sleep peptide” image implied by the name DSIP has not been scientifically confirmed.

What did the insomnia studies show?

DSIP’s effect on sleep in humans was tested between 1981 and 1992, mainly in Switzerland and at several centers, in small studies of 6–18 people. In all studies, the substance was given intravenously. FDA’s 2026 assessment examines these studies one by one. ^[8]

According to FDA’s assessment, the favorable results come largely from the same researcher’s studies, two double-blind, placebo-controlled studies with similar design did not reach the same result, and it is uncertain whether even the favorable findings are clinically meaningful. The agency states that the evidence is insufficient to reach a conclusion about the effectiveness of intravenous DSIP in insomnia. ^[8] According to FDA’s account, the American College of Physicians (ACP) guideline recommends cognitive behavioral therapy as first-line treatment in chronic insomnia; the ACP and American Academy of Sleep Medicine (AASM) guidelines do not address DSIP. ^[8]

Alcohol and opioid withdrawal studies

Animal findings that DSIP might interact with the opioid system led to the substance being tried in withdrawal treatment. ^[6]

Geneva study (1984). In an open study without a control group, intravenous DSIP was given to 107 inpatients experiencing alcohol (47) or opioid (60) withdrawal; the effect was measured by the clinical assessment of physicians and nurses. About 13% and 22% of patients did not meet the evaluation conditions. According to the abstract, symptoms disappeared or improved markedly and rapidly in 97% of the evaluated opioid patients and 87% of the alcohol patients; anxiety decreased more slowly, and headache was reported in a few patients. ^[6] FDA’s review states that 40 of the 60 people in the opioid group were evaluated, that in some of the patients counted as successes anxiety returned with marked insomnia 24–72 hours after treatment ended, and that only 13 people had no insomnia. The agency emphasizes that the study had no blinding or comparison group, used no standard scales, and did not adequately describe how it verified improvement. ^[8]

1998 open study. In an open study of 7 patients diagnosed with opioid dependence, according to FDA’s account, the withdrawal symptom score fell from a mean of 34.4 to 17.8 after the first injection. ^[7] However, according to FDA’s account, only 2 patients received all the planned injections, and both needed another drug for insomnia on the third day; return of symptoms after the second and later injections could not be prevented except in one patient. The authors left whether DSIP could be an effective alternative as “an open question” and proposed a placebo-controlled study. ^[8]

FDA states that evidence of efficacy for withdrawal is insufficient, that the results rest on small, nonrandomized, and uncontrolled studies, and that approved drugs exist for this indication. ^[8] These studies cannot be interpreted as a treatment option.

Safety: what is known and unknown

According to FDA’s compilation, no significant side effects were reported in the few participants who received intravenous DSIP in the insomnia studies. In the 107-person withdrawal study, transient side effects such as sweating, headache, nausea, and dizziness were seen in 9 patients and serious side effects in 3 patients: a blood pressure drop at the start of the first injection in two, and recurrent episodes of weakness, sweating, and nausea in one. “Progressive” blood pressure drop was reported in a patient who received the second injection. Some of these side effects may have been confounded with the withdrawal picture itself. ^[8]

FDA states that no safety data exist for subcutaneous injection, the recommended method of use for products sold today; that a nine-amino-acid peptide may produce an immune response because of aggregation and impurities and that this may be increased by injection. The agency also notes that, according to animal data, DSIP’s effects arise partly through the opioid system and that this might lead to the development of dependence, but that it found no animal study examining dependence potential. ^[8] There are no data for pregnancy, breastfeeding, or long-term use. For general peptide risks: Peptide side effects.

What did FDA say about DSIP?

DSIP (emideltide) was nominated for the list of substances that can be used in drug compounding in pharmacies in the US for chronic insomnia, narcolepsy, and opioid withdrawal. The main findings of FDA’s assessment prepared for the July 2026 advisory committee are as follows: ^[8]

• License and recognition: No form of emideltide appears in the European, Japanese, or International Pharmacopoeia, and it is not registered as a licensed drug in any country FDA searched. The same document also reports, based on a 2003 article, that a preparation containing DSIP and glycine, developed at an institute affiliated with the Russian Academy of Sciences, was marketed in ampoule form; these two pieces of information stand side by side in the document.
• Market: The substance, studied in humans since at least 1981, has been used in drug compounding in the US since at least 2018; injection and nasal spray products are available in clinics, medical spas, and from internet sellers.
• Efficacy: There is no efficacy study for the recommended subcutaneous route; intravenous studies are insufficient to reach a conclusion in insomnia and withdrawal. For narcolepsy, the evidence consists of a case study in a single patient and is too limited to be interpretable.
• Quality: The substance is not well defined chemically; inconsistent naming, limited water solubility, and a lack of impurity, aggregation, and endotoxin testing are listed.
• Conclusion: FDA experts recommended that it not be added to the list.

On July 24, 2026, the FDA advisory committee recommended, by 6 yes, 7 no, and 1 abstention, that DSIP not be added to the list; at the same meeting, favorable recommendations emerged for some other peptides. ^[10] On FDA’s April 22, 2026 safety risk page, emideltide appears in the table of substances “nominated but withdrawn by the nominators,” on the grounds of immune response, impurity, and lack of safety information for the recommended route. ^[9] None of these processes is a drug approval.

Is DSIP prohibited in sport?

The WADA 2026 Prohibited List does not name DSIP or emideltide. The list’s S0 class prohibits, in and out of competition at all times, pharmacological substances not covered in any other section of the list and not approved by any governmental health authority for human therapeutic use. ^[11] Because emideltide was not found as a licensed drug in any country searched in FDA’s screening, this definition is directly relevant for licensed athletes; taking into account also the DSIP-glycine preparation that the same FDA document reports as offered in ampoule form in Russia, the concrete classification is within WADA’s authority. ^[8]

What is the status of DSIP in Türkiye?

A guide covering the legal status of peptides in general: Are peptides legal? The meaning of the “for research purposes” label: What does research peptide mean?

Evidence table: claim, population, and limits

Limits of this guide

This page summarizes published studies and official documents on DSIP. It contains no individualized dose, preparation, method of administration, cycle length, or product source. Evaluating treatments with evidence for insomnia and substance withdrawal is the physician’s task. Regulatory status may change; the information on this page is valid as of October 2026.