Selank is not FDA-approved and no milligram or microgram dose for it appears in any registered trial record or English-language label. This page explains what the evidence does and does not establish. It is not a protocol, and it deliberately does not assert a figure the literature cannot support.
Overview
Most dosing pages can start with a number. This one cannot, and that absence is the most useful thing it can tell you.
Selank is administered as an intranasal solution and is used in Russian clinical practice over short courses of roughly two weeks. Those two facts — route and course length — are what the accessible published record supports. The specific microgram figures that circulate widely online are not traceable to a trial protocol, a registry entry, or a label available for outside inspection.
What the published record actually contains
The trials that anchor Selank's clinical reputation do not report doses in their indexed abstracts. The 62-patient comparison against medazepam in generalized anxiety disorder and neurasthenia describes design, comparator, and outcomes, but no administered amount (Zh Nevrol Psikhiatr Im S S Korsakova 2008; PMID 18454096). Neither does the 60-patient comparison against phenazepam (Zh Nevrol Psikhiatr Im S S Korsakova 2014; PMID 25176261).
The clearest schedule detail available is duration: a companion study of cytokine effects in patients with generalized anxiety disorder and neurasthenia states that participants "received Selank during 14 days" (Zh Nevrol Psikhiatr Im S S Korsakova 2008; PMID 18577961), which is consistent with the short-course pattern described throughout this literature.
Selank also has no entry on ClinicalTrials.gov. There is no registered protocol to consult, which is why the dose question has no authoritative answer outside the Russian regulatory system that registered the medicine.
Where the circulating numbers come from
Figures in the range of a few hundred micrograms per day, split across administrations, appear consistently in vendor listings and community write-ups. They may well approximate Russian clinical practice. What can be said with confidence is what they are not: they are not sourced to a peer-reviewed protocol, and repetition across websites is not verification.
A second problem compounds the first. Concentration, not volume, determines dose. A "drop" or "spray" delivers whatever amount of peptide is dissolved in it, so the same instruction applied to two differently concentrated solutions produces two different doses. Community figures expressed in drops carry no information unless the concentration is also known and accurate.
Route and formulation
Selank's studied route is intranasal, relying on absorption across the nasal mucosa, and its short duration of action is why administration is described as daily or divided rather than weekly. As a peptide it is not orally active.
A meaningful share of material sold internationally is lyophilised powder marketed for reconstitution and injection. That route has no clinical trial behind it. Borrowing an intranasal figure and administering it subcutaneously changes bioavailability, distribution, and local tolerance simultaneously, and nothing in the literature describes the result.
With unregulated research chemicals, identity and peptide content vary between suppliers, so even careful arithmetic rests on an assumption about the vial that no one has verified.
Why oversight matters
Selank acts on the GABA system as a positive allosteric modulator and interacts in laboratory work with diazepam and olanzapine at that system (Protein & Peptide Letters 2018; PMID 30255741). Anyone taking prescribed psychiatric medication is therefore in territory where an interaction is mechanistically plausible and clinically unstudied.
Beyond that, anxiety is a diagnosable condition with established treatments, and every Selank trial enrolled patients who had been formally diagnosed. The relevant decision is not which number to use but whether an unapproved peptide with no registered protocol and no independent replication belongs in that picture at all — which is a clinician's question, not a dosing one.