Named for an effect, not a mechanism
DSIP was isolated from the blood of rabbits induced into a sleep-like state, and named after the sleep stage the researchers connected it to. Naming a molecule after an observed effect was normal practice at the time; it also locks in an interpretation before the mechanism is understood.
Half a century later the mechanism is still not established. There is no confirmed receptor and no agreed account of how the peptide would produce the effect its name asserts.
A field that never grew
Research activity peaked relatively early and then thinned out. Some work looked at stress-response markers and pain thresholds alongside the sleep question, but replication has been limited and no sustained programme developed.
Silence in a field means nobody carried the work forward, which is different from somebody disproving it and different again from somebody confirming it. The confident summaries circulating online are, almost without exception, retellings of the same handful of old papers.
| Length | 9 amino acids |
| Isolated | From rabbit blood, 1970s |
| Named after | The sleep stage associated with it |
| Receptor | Not established |
| Format | Nasal spray |
| Purity | ≥ 99% (HPLC) |
| Evidence base | Small and largely historical |
| Category | Research use only |
Release specification. Any effect claim you have read elsewhere is not supported here.
Nine residues, and the nasal route
At nine amino acids DSIP is short enough for the mucosal route to be worth investigating, which is why it appears in the catalogue as a spray rather than a pen.
That is the same reason the other sprays here are all short sequences. Chain length, not preference, decides which formats are worth offering.
DSIP in the catalogue
HPLC release testing at 99% minimum, one certificate per production lot.
Where this fits in
The rest of the picture, in three pages.
About DSIP
What readers ask once they have got this far.