Scientific deep-dive

DSIP: A Sleep Peptide Named in 1977, With No Known Receptor

Delta sleep-inducing peptide was isolated in 1977 and named after a brain-wave effect seen in rabbits. A review of the field states the sleep hypothesis is extremely poorly documented and weak, and that no gene, protein or receptor has been isolated.

By Ruth Calder · Enforcement Editor
Editorially reviewed. Not medical advice · How we verify contentLast reviewed
4 min read·2 citations

Part of Peptides: what the evidence shows

Delta sleep-inducing peptide is sold for sleep, and its name is the entire sales pitch. It was isolated in 1977 from rabbit cerebral venous blood and named after an early brain-wave effect in rabbits. A review of the field put the position plainly: the hypothesis regarding DSIP as a sleep factor is extremely poorly documented and still weak. The DSIP gene, its protein and any related receptor have not been isolated.[1]

The name is a hypothesis, not a description

In 1977 a group in Basel isolated a substance from the blood of rabbits and, after it increased slow-wave (delta) brain activity when infused into rabbit brains, called it delta sleep-inducing peptide.[2] Names given at the point of discovery stick regardless of what follows. Nearly fifty years later the compound is sold under a label that states an effect the literature never established.

The review’s own title, “a still unresolved riddle,” is an unusually candid summary from inside a field. It records that the link between DSIP and sleep has never been further characterized, and that the peptide’s natural occurrence and biological activity remain obscure.[1]

Why the missing receptor settles it

Most arguments about supplement evidence are about trial quality: sample sizes, controls, endpoints. This one is simpler and comes earlier. A peptide produces effects by binding something. If no receptor has been identified, there is no demonstrated route by which the molecule could produce the effect its name claims.

The DSIP gene, its protein and any related receptor have not been isolated.

The review attributes the stalled state of the field partly to this: the absence of an isolated gene, protein and receptor is why the sleep link was never characterized further.[1] The review is from 2006. We are describing what it documents, not asserting that nothing has happened in the two decades since. In what we found, no subsequent body of clinical evidence has displaced it.

If sleep is the actual problem

  • DSIP is not an approved medicine anywhere and is sold as a research chemical, with no identity, purity or dose guarantee.
  • Poor sleep has causes worth identifying. Sleep apnea in particular is common, treatable, and strongly associated with excess weight.
  • Cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia has a substantial randomized evidence base and is the first-line recommendation in guidelines.
  • A peptide named after the effect you want is not evidence that it produces the effect you want.

For sleep-disordered breathing, where there is an approved drug and a randomized trial, see Zepbound for sleep apnea. For what happened to sleep quality in people starting a GLP‑1, see sleep and mood on a GLP-1. For the regulatory position on research-use peptides, see what FDA actually said about BPC-157. The three small insomnia trials, and FDA's note on emideltide, are summarized on our DSIP profile.

Frequently Asked Questions

A review of the field states that the hypothesis of DSIP as a sleep factor is extremely poorly documented and still weak, and that the link between DSIP and sleep has never been further characterized since the peptide was isolated in 1977.
Because researchers in Basel, who isolated it from rabbit cerebral venous blood in 1977, saw it increase slow-wave (delta) brain activity when infused into rabbit brains. The name records that early animal finding, not a demonstrated sleep effect in people, and it has stuck ever since.
According to the review, the DSIP gene, protein and any possible related receptor have not been isolated. Without an identified target there is no demonstrated mechanism by which the peptide could produce the effect its name claims.
Get the cause identified. Sleep apnea is common and treatable, particularly with excess weight, and cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia has a large randomized evidence base and is a first-line guideline recommendation.

References

  1. 1.Kovalzon VM, Strekalova TV. Delta sleep-inducing peptide (DSIP): a still unresolved riddle Journal of Neurochemistry. 2006. PMID: 16539679.
  2. 2.Schoenenberger GA, Monnier M. Characterization of a delta-electroencephalogram (-sleep)-inducing peptide Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 1977. PMID: 265572.

PT-141 (Bremelanotide): What the Evidence Shows

PT-141 is bremelanotide, approved as Vyleesi only for low sexual desire in premenopausal women. Its phase 3 trials found small gains in desire and no rise in satisfying sexual events. The men's program stopped in 2007 over blood pressure.

11 min read

Thymosin Alpha 1 (Thymalfasin): What the Evidence Shows

Thymosin alpha 1, sold abroad as Zadaxin, is licensed in 30+ countries for hepatitis B but was never FDA-approved. Its largest sepsis trial found no benefit, and FDA's advisers voted 17 to 4 against letting pharmacies compound it.

10 min read

KPV: What the Evidence Shows, and What FDA Found

KPV, a fragment of alpha-MSH, calmed gut inflammation in mouse colitis studies. FDA's 2026 review found no human data. It is not approved or on the 503A bulks list; under an interim HHS policy dated October 2026, HHS does not intend to take enforcement action against topical or oral 503A compounding under strict conditions.

9 min read

Elamipretide (SS-31): The Phase 3 Trial That Missed Both Endpoints

Elamipretide has what almost no research-use peptide has: a completed pivotal phase 3 trial in 218 people. It missed both primary endpoints, with a six-minute walk difference of -3.2 meters and a p value of 0.69.

5 min read

BPC-157 vs TB-500: Two Recovery Peptides, One With No Human Studies

BPC-157 has three small uncontrolled human reports, and FDA found no human study of TB-500. Since October 28, 2026, an HHS policy covers compounded BPC-157 acetate by injection, capsule or topical product and TB-500 acetate by injection only. Blends are not covered.

9 min read

5-Amino-1MQ: What the Evidence Shows, and What FDA Has Said

5-amino-1MQ is not a peptide but a small molecule that blocks the enzyme NNMT. Injected into obese mice it caused about 5% weight loss in 11 days. No human study exists, it is on no FDA compounding list, and FDA cited a 503B facility for using it in 2026.

9 min read

Where to get GLP-1 online, safely: sellers our editors have checked

These are telehealth sellers our editors have checked. For each one we hold a price, the form the drug comes in, and the states it reaches.

No insurance needed · vetted by our editors

Some of the links on this page earn us money. If you sign up with a provider after following one, that provider may pay GLP Watchdog a commission. Learn more

9.1

Collective

Flat any-dose pricing, if you can absorb a $199 annual membership on top

From $59/mo + membership

Get started →
Read full review →
9.0

YourEra

Semaglutide at $99/month, well below the typical price

7.4

Wellorithm

Compounded semaglutide at a flat $247 every 28 days, any dose

About this analysis

GLP Watchdog publishes independently. Each seller in our dataset is checked against that seller's own website, and the dataset is updated continuously. Read our full methodology →