Skip to content

Neuro & cognitive

DSIP / Emideltide

A neuropeptide named for a sleep effect first described in the 1970s that decades of follow-up have never clearly replicated in humans.

L1MechanisticExperimental / researchUnclearVery low confidenceLast reviewed 2026-08-23

Also known as: Delta sleep-inducing peptide, emideltide

Evidence passport

Last reviewed 2026-08-23

Evidence level
L1Mechanistic
Confidence
Very low confidence
Human efficacy
8/100
Human safety
8/100
Regulatory status
Experimental / research
Development
Unclear
Routes
Evidence base
Mostly preclinical
Furthest stage
Not established
Source curation
Sources fully curated
Clinical maturity
Historical small studies with inconsistent results

Most of this evidence comes from animals and cells

The supporting research for DSIP / Emideltide is predominantly preclinical (Level 1–2). That is a legitimate starting point for science and a poor basis for personal decisions. Human results are not simply a scaled-up version of mouse results.

Overview

Human evidence8/100
Preclinical evidence35/100
Human safety evidence8/100

Clinical maturity: Historical small studies with inconsistent results

Routes & formulations

The curated record does not establish a studied route with consistent findings. Research-market products are unapproved, and route availability is not evidence of effect.

Route availability is not evidence of efficacy, and evidence from one route does not transfer to another. The Registry never provides dosing or sourcing information.

Peptide lifecycle

  1. Discovery

  2. Preclinical

  3. Phase I

  4. Phase II

  5. Phase III

  6. Approved

UnclearFurthest stage not established in our curated record

No established development programme in the curated record; historical research only.

What it is

A nine-amino-acid peptide named in the 1970s after reports that it induced delta-wave sleep in animals. Its name describes a finding that later work struggled to reproduce.

What people claim

  • Induces deep sleep
  • Helps insomnia, opioid withdrawal and narcolepsy

What the evidence actually says

The gap between the name and the evidence is the story here. Human studies have been small, old and inconsistent, and sleep efficacy in humans has never been convincingly demonstrated. A name is not a result.

Human evidence

  • Small historical human studies with inconsistent findings; no adequately powered controlled trials establish sleep benefit.

Preclinical evidence

  • Animal electrophysiology and behavioural studies from multiple decades, with mixed replication.

Animal and cell findings are Level 1–2 evidence.

Mechanism and pathways

  • Proposed modulation of sleep-regulating circuits; mechanism remains unestablished.

Safety and unknowns

  • The FDA's 503A Category 2 listing identifies significant safety risks for compounding; the July 2026 PCAC review covers its nominations.
  • No systematic human safety dataset exists.

Cancer relevance

No established human signal

No established human cancer signal; systematically unstudied.

Regulatory status

Not an approved medicine in any major region. It appears on the FDA 503A Category 2 list of bulk substances presenting significant safety risks for compounding and was scheduled for Pharmacy Compounding Advisory Committee review in July 2026 across insomnia, opioid-withdrawal and narcolepsy-related nominations.

Evidence grade

L1MechanisticVery low confidence

Cell, receptor or computational work explaining how something could work.

What would change our rating?

  • Adequately powered, pre-registered controlled trials with objective sleep endpoints.

References and sources

Sources fully curated

Source hierarchy: regulatory documents and trial registries first, peer-reviewed work next, sponsor material flagged as non-independent. We never use supplier or clinic marketing as evidence, and where a verified source has not yet been curated we say so rather than inventing one.

Evidence change history

No recorded changes yet. Baseline position set on 2026-08-23.