Audit: QRS - Cocoa Flavanols for Health & Longevity

Audit conducted on 07/09/2026 08:34 using AI4L / Opus 5

Summary

Items	Count
Total	93
Passed	83
Failed	0
N/A	10
Pass Rate	100.00%

Total = Passed + Failed + N/A
Pass Rate = Passed / (Passed + Failed) × 100
N/A items are excluded from the pass rate calculation

1. General Rules

#	Description	Result	Comments
1.1	Every claim, magnitude, label, recommendation, and statement in the QRS is literally supported by content in the source ER.	🟢	Every populated span traces to ER text: protocol cells to ER lines 369–377, time cells to ER line 421, benefits/risks to the ER tier headings, gates to ER lines 322–347, markers to the ER table (lines 453–464), qualitative items to ER lines 468–473.
1.2	Where the ER uses cautious phrasing (“not formally studied”, “None documented in human trials to date”, “theoretical concern”, “data are limited”), the QRS uses the same phrasing.	🟢	At-a-glance carries the ER Conclusion’s hedges: “Whether this prevents heart events is less clear” (ER line 495) and “findings are mixed”. marker_12_target keeps “No established target for this intervention” verbatim.
1.3	The QRS never strengthens an ER claim (e.g., “not formally studied” → “not required”) or softens one (e.g., “do not use during pregnancy” → “use with caution during pregnancy”).	🟢	All six ER “Populations who should avoid” entries remain in the Contraindications gate; none demoted to Key Interactions. No caution-tier item promoted to a contraindication.
1.4	The QRS does not relabel an ER fact under a different decision category. A “Benefit-Modifying Factor” from ER section is not surfaced as a “Caution”; a “Risk-Modifying Factor” is not surfaced as a “Side Effect”; etc.	🟢	Nothing from ER `Benefit-Modifying Factors` or `Risk-Modifying Factors` appears in the gates or the risks card; each QRS section draws from its mandated ER section.
1.5	PubMed IDs, study citations, expert names, clinical trial identifiers (NCT*), and brand names appear in the QRS only if they appear in the source ER for the same fact.	🟢	The QRS contains no PubMed IDs, no NCT identifiers, no investigator names and no brand names (CocoaVia, Mars Edge, ConsumerLab all omitted).
1.6	The QRS does not introduce new attributions.	🟢	No attributions of any kind appear in the QRS.

2. Focus, Tone & Audience

#	Description	Result	Comments
2.1	The QRS follows the tone of the ER, which is determined by the ER’s own language, phrasing, and framing.	🟢	Flat, declarative, evidence-first register throughout, matching the ER (e.g., “Vessel widening is measurable about two hours after a single dose”, ER line 421).
2.2	The tone of the QRS is simultaneously expert, accessible, objective, and data-driven, but also empowering and encouraging	🟢	Targets and cadences are concrete and actionable while contamination and stimulant caveats are stated without alarm.
2.3	The QRS reads as a trusted, knowledgeable guide rather than a prescriptive doctor	🟢	Content is stated as findings and reference values; no directives are issued.
2.4	The QRS avoids language that implies medical or clinical advice	🟢	No prescriptive verbs; the footer disclaimer is the template’s unmodified text.
2.5	The QRS “presents information” instead of “providing guidance”, “recommending”, or “advising”	🟢	Cadence line states intervals as facts (“Home blood pressure at four and eight weeks”), not as instructions.
2.6	The QRS never addresses “the reader” directly — it presents evidence, not guidance	🟢	No second-person pronouns anywhere in the document; marker_12_target uses “the individual’s own pre-start baseline”.
2.7	The QRS is written in plain language, avoiding unnecessary medical jargon	🟢	Terms are spelled out (“low-density lipoprotein cholesterol”, “estimated glomerular filtration rate”); no bare acronyms.
2.8	Information is presented in a concise and very compact manner	🟢	Each ER interaction bullet (four sentences) is compressed to a single label-plus-effect clause; the ER’s 4-column monitoring table is reduced to 3 columns.
2.9	It DOES NOT address the reader directly	🟢	Confirmed: no “you”, “your”, or imperative constructions.
2.10	The target audience is health- and longevity-oriented adults who are risk-aware, proactive, and actively seeking to optimize health or apply the intervention under review.	🟢	Optimal functional ranges (ApoB below 70 mg/dL, hsCRP below 0.5 mg/L) rather than conventional clinical cut-offs signal the optimizer audience.
2.11	The target audience is willing to employ lifestyle and behavioral changes as well as follow protocols that may be inconvenient, costly, or require effort.	🟢	Twelve-marker monitoring panel including whole-blood cadmium and blood lead assumes substantial willingness to test.
2.12	The document is NOT written for the general population, who are unwilling to employ lifestyle and behavioral changes or follow protocols that may be inconvenient, costly, or require effort.	🟢	Standardized extract dosing and metal testing are well beyond general-population expectations.
2.13	Framing, takeaways, and risk/benefit weighting throughout the document reflect this audience, including where an intervention’s signal for the average person differs from its signal for this audience.	🟢	At-a-glance names the responder group explicitly (“most in those whose pressure is already raised”) and flags the chocolate-carrier and contamination costs.
2.14	The document’s own voice frames usage in longevity terms, not “anti-aging” (e.g., “anti-aging clinics”, “anti-aging community”, “anti-aging medicine”). Proper names that contain “anti-aging” (e.g., “American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine”) are quoted verbatim.	🟢	The string “anti-aging” does not occur; the header topic uses “Health & Longevity”.
2.15	The document’s own voice uses formal clinical and scientific terminology, not colloquial or consumer-grade language (e.g., “oral medication” not “pill(s)”; “injection” not “shot”; “adverse event” not “bad reaction”). Direct quotes from sources are exempt.	🟢	“capsules”, “estimated glomerular filtration rate”, “methylxanthine”, “hyperoxaluria”; plain-language wording is confined to the At-A-Glance span, where item 7.4 requires it.

3. Template Integrity

#	Description	Result	Comments
3.1	The following labels and headings on the QRS are fixed and not modified: Card and section headings: “Protocol”, “Time to effect”, “Benefits”, “Risk & Side Effects”, “Monitoring”, “Qualitative Assessment”; Gate headings: “Contraindications”, “Key Interactions”; Tier labels: “High”, “Medium”, “Low”, “Speculative”; Table column headers in Monitoring: “Marker”, “Target”, “Why”	🟢	All headings, gate heads, tier labels and table headers are byte-identical to [qrs_template].
3.2	All “…” from the [qrs_template] are present in the the QRS.	🟢	All 34 template variable names present; the repeatable `marker_#_*` row is expanded to 12 rows and `qualitative_item_#` to 6 items.
3.3	Spans that are not addressed in a checklist item are left unchanged	🟢	`<span website="evidence_review">`, `<span website="audit">` and `<span website="full_review">` are unchanged; a diff of lines 1–410 against the template shows the entire style block byte-identical.

4. Formatting

#	Description	Result	Comments
4.1	When the source ER section is empty, the QRS uses the ER’s own empty-state phrasing verbatim. Typical phrasings are “None documented in human trials to date” and “Not formally studied”	N/A	No source ER section mapped into the QRS is empty.
4.2	Where the ER presents a bulleted item as “Label: content”, the QRS uses the ER’s bold label verbatim as the cell or row label.	🟢	“Standard dose”, “Extract-based approach”, “Best time of day” match ER lines 369, 371, 377 verbatim; interaction labels match ER lines 322–338.
4.3	Labels are not paraphrased, abbreviated, or invented.	🟢	Marker names match the ER table’s first column verbatim; time-to-effect labels are the subjects of the ER’s own “Time to effect” bullet (line 421).
4.4	The QRS DOES NOT use emoji indicators (no 🟩, 🟥, 🟨, etc.). Color and emphasis are conveyed through CSS and bold labels.	🟢	No emoji characters occur; the ER’s ⚠️ “Conflicted” markers are dropped and tiering is carried by bold labels plus CSS.
4.5	The QRS is designed to render on one A4 page. Any section that has more content in the ER than fits the per-section budget is condensed by the LLM, not extended onto a second page.	🟢	Every section is condensed rather than extended: interaction bullets reduced to one clause each, the monitoring table’s Context/Notes column dropped, benefit and risk tiers collapsed to semicolon-separated phrases.

5. Metadata

#	Description	Result	Comments
5.1	The metadata is placed inside a single HTML comment that is the first element after “<!doctype html>” and before any other comment, head, or body content.	🟢	Single comment at lines 2–14, immediately after `<!doctype html>` on line 1.
5.2	Inside that HTML comment the YAML block is delimited by a line “—” opening and a line “—” closing. Text before the opening “—” is permitted but is not parsed as YAML.	🟢	Opening `---` at line 3, closing `---` at line 13; the preceding title line is permitted lead-in text.
5.3	The metadata is not visible in any rendered view of the QRS and is not surfaced by any other element on the sheet.	🟢	Enclosed in an HTML comment; no metadata value is echoed by any visible element.
5.4	All frontmatter values are trimmed: no leading or trailing whitespace, no surrounding quotes unless the value contains a colon, bracket, or leading special character that requires YAML quoting.	🟢	All values trimmed; only `duration: "00:03"` is quoted, which is required because it contains a colon.
5.5	The filename of the source ER is stated as “er_filename: [er_filename]”	🟢	Line 4: `er_filename: cocoa_flavanols_2026-0907-0455_Opus_ER.md`.
5.6	Version of the QRS.md file used to create the document is stated as “qrs_prompt_version: [Version of QRS.md]”	🟢	Line 5: `qrs_prompt_version: 26.7.02`, matching the QRS.md version badge.
5.7	Creation date and time of the document is stated as “qrs_creation_date: [YYYY-MMDD-HHMM]” (e.g., 2026-0501-1430)	🟢	Line 6: `qrs_creation_date: 2026-0907-0829`, correct format.
5.8	The nickname of the AI used to create the document is stated as “qrs_creator_ai_nickname: [qrs_creator_ai_nickname]”	🟢	Line 7: `qrs_creator_ai_nickname: Opus`.
5.9	The nickname of the AI is just a single word model name without version, etc. (e.g., Opus, Sonnet, Grok, Gemini, ChatGPT)	🟢	“Opus” is a single word with no version or qualifier.
5.10	The full name of the AI used to create the document is stated as “qrs_creator_ai_fullname: [qrs_creator_ai_fullname]”	🟢	Line 8: `qrs_creator_ai_fullname: Opus 5`.
5.11	The full name of the AI consists of the [qrs_creator_ai_nickname] and the model version number and no additional qualifier (e.g., Opus 4.6, Sonnet 3.2, Grok 4.5, Gemini 3.1, ChatGPT 5.4)	🟢	“Opus 5” is nickname plus version number, with no trailing qualifier.
5.12	The filename of the document is stated as “qrs_filename: [filename of this document]”	🟢	Line 9 matches the file’s actual name, `cocoa_flavanols_2026-0907-0455_Opus_QRS.html`.
5.13	All frontmatter values are trimmed: no leading or trailing whitespace, no surrounding quotes unless the value contains a colon, bracket, or leading special character that requires YAML quoting.	🟢	Re-verified across all nine keys, including `git_user: evipedia-2` and `git_issue: 5874`, which are unquoted as required.

#	Description	Result	Comments
6.1	[page_title] is set to the [canonical_topic] of the ER `frontmatter` followed by “ - Quick Reference Sheet” (e.g., “Intervention - Quick Reference Sheet”). The [canonical_topic] is HTML-entity-encoded as needed (e.g., `&` for `&`)	🟢	Line 22: “Cocoa Flavanols for Health & Longevity - Quick Reference Sheet”; ampersand correctly encoded.
6.2	[header_topic] is set to the [canonical_topic] of the ER `frontmatter`, with HTML entities encoded as needed (e.g., `&` for `&`)	🟢	Line 417: “Cocoa Flavanols for Health & Longevity”, matching ER frontmatter line 8.
6.3	[header_subline_date] is set to [qrs_creation_date reformatted as MM/DD/YYYY]	🟢	Line 421: “09/07/2026”, the correct MM/DD/YYYY rendering of 2026-0907.
6.4	[header_subline_model] is set to [qrs_creator_ai_fullname]	🟢	Line 425: “Opus 5”, matching the frontmatter value.
6.5	No additional header content appears: no badge, version stamp, AKA / alternate names line, source-AI attribution, audit date, or QRS variant marker.	🟢	The header carries only the title and the template’s unmodified subline; the ER’s “Also known as” list is not carried over.

7. At-A-Glance Section

#	Description	Result	Comments
7.1	[at_a_glance] is dense, execution-oriented summary of the ER `Conclusion` section	🟢	Compresses ER Conclusion paragraphs 1–2 (lines 495–497) into vascular effect, responder group, uncertain endpoints, and the two delivery-side costs.
7.2	[at_a_glance] is no longer than 60 words	🟢	57 words.
7.3	Every fact in [at_a_glance] is supported by a distinct passage in the ER.	🟢	Vessel/pressure/cholesterol → ER line 495; “less clear” on events → ER line 495; mixed memory/skin/glucose → ER line 495; poor carrier and metal concentration → ER line 497.
7.4	It DOES NOT use acronyms or technical classifications that require specialist knowledge, uses plain-language terms instead	🟢	Uses “widens arteries”, “blood pressure”, “cholesterol”, “cadmium and lead”; no acronyms and no clinical-register vocabulary.
7.5	It DOES NOT cite specific trials (names, years, sample sizes, p-values)	🟢	No trial name, year, cohort size or p-value appears.
7.6	It DOES NOT cite effect sizes, relative risks, or statistical results	🟢	No numeric effect estimate, hazard ratio or confidence interval appears.

8. Contraindications

#	Description	Result	Comments
8.1	The section is derived from the ER `Key Interactions & Contraindications` section	🟢	All six items map to the ER’s “Populations who should avoid Cocoa Flavanols” list, ER lines 342–347.
8.2	[stop_items] represent the Contraindications from the ER	🟢	All six ER avoid-population entries are present; none added, none omitted.
8.3	Individual [stop_items] are formatted as <li></li>	🟢	Six `<li>` elements inside the `stop_items` span, lines 572–580.
8.4	Items are as concise as possible. No trailing explanations, no elaborations, no mechanistic rationale, no attributions, no citations, no study details. No content after an em-dash, en-dash, or hyphen-dash (e.g., “— dose reduction required”, “— reduced efficacy”) — these trailing clauses are stripped. Just the key fact.	🟢	Rationales stripped: “because of reported fetal ductus arteriosus constriction”, “given retained cadmium and cocoa’s potassium load” and the children/lead-threshold clause are all removed; no dash-trailing clauses remain.
8.5	Parenthetical qualifiers from the ER bullet — time windows, severity classes, threshold values, clinical staging — ARE preserved as part of the item, kept as concise as possible (shortened or trimmed where needed to fit the one-page budget, but never dropped entirely).	🟢	“third trimester”, “about 125 mg daily”, “below 100 mmHg”, “stage 4 or 5 (estimated glomerular filtration rate below 30 mL/min/1.73 m²)” and “with documented hyperoxaluria” are all retained.
8.6	When the ER uses ranking notation inside parens (e.g., “>” for severity ordering) that depends on an explanatory phrase to interpret, normalize the items to a plain comma-separated list rather than carrying through the bare symbol.	N/A	The ER uses no ranking notation inside parentheses in its contraindication list.
8.7	The section is left empty ONLY IF the ER’s `Key Interactions & Contraindications` section identifies no population, condition, or scenario for which the intervention should be avoided, deferred, or used only under specialist supervision.	🟢	The ER names six avoid-populations and the section is correspondingly populated, not empty.
8.8	If the section is left empty, an HTML comment inside the [stop_items] span records the ER basis for the absence, naming or quoting the ER text relied on. E.g.	N/A	The section is not empty.

9. Key Interactions

#	Description	Result	Comments
9.1	The section is derived from the ER `Key Interactions & Contraindications` section	🟢	All nine items map one-to-one to the ER interaction bullets at lines 322–338.
9.2	[caution_items] represent the Key Interactions from the ER, excluding any that are already listed as Contraindications	🟢	Nine interaction bullets carried across; no overlap with the six contraindication entries.
9.3	Individual [caution_items] are formatted as <li></li>	🟢	Nine `<li>` elements inside the `caution_items` span, lines 588–605.
9.4	Items are as concise as possible. No trailing explanations, no elaborations, no mechanistic rationale, no attributions, no citations, no study details. No content after an em-dash, en-dash, or hyphen-dash (e.g., “— dose reduction required”, “— reduced efficacy”) — these trailing clauses are stripped. Just the key fact.	🟢	Each ER bullet’s “Severity:”, “Consequence:” and mitigation sentences are stripped, leaving label plus the single additive-effect clause; no dash-trailing clauses remain.
9.5	Parenthetical qualifiers from the ER bullet — example drug lists, time windows, severity classes, threshold values, clinical staging — ARE preserved as part of the item, kept as concise as possible (shortened or trimmed where needed to fit the one-page budget, but never dropped entirely).	🟢	Every named drug and supplement from the ER parentheses survives; only the class-descriptor phrases (“ACE inhibitors:”, “drugs for chest pain and erectile dysfunction:”) are trimmed, as permitted.
9.6	When the ER uses ranking notation inside parens (e.g., “>” for severity ordering) that depends on an explanatory phrase to interpret, normalize the items to a plain comma-separated list rather than carrying through the bare symbol.	N/A	The ER uses no ranking notation inside parentheses in its interaction list.
9.7	The section is left empty ONLY IF the ER’s `Key Interactions & Contraindications` section identifies no interaction, additive effect, or exposure that changes how the intervention is used.	🟢	The ER lists nine such interactions and the section is correspondingly populated, not empty.
9.8	If the section is left empty, an HTML comment inside the [caution_items] span records the ER basis for the absence, naming or quoting the ER text relied on. E.g.	N/A	The section is not empty.

10. Protocol

#	Description	Result	Comments
10.1	The section is derived from the ER `Protocol` section	🟢	All three cells derive from the ER `Therapeutic Protocol` bullets at lines 369, 371, 373 and 377.
10.2	The three sets of [action] items cover the three most important actionable implementation aspects from the ER `Protocol` section	🟢	Dose, delivery form and timing — the only three ER protocol bullets that are directly executable; the remaining bullets are attribution, pharmacokinetics and modifier discussion.
10.3	If less that three distinct actionable implementation aspects are mentioned in the ER the unused sets are left empty and made invisible, not filled with placeholder text or empty-state phrasing.	N/A	The ER supplies at least three distinct actionable aspects, so all three sets are used.
10.4	All used [action_#label], [action#value], [action#_sub] items are filled with meaningful content derived from the ER `Protocol` section.	🟢	All nine spans populated; the 500 mg / 80 mg epicatechin / 450–900 mg / 710 mg figures and the 10–25 g whole-food alternative all match ER lines 369 and 373.

11. Time to Effect

#	Description	Result	Comments
11.1	The three sets of [time] items cover the three most important time-to-effect aspects from the ER	🟢	Blood pressure, vessel widening and hard cardiovascular endpoints — the exact three latencies given in the ER’s “Time to effect” bullet, line 421.
11.2	The sets are picked and ordered by the magnitude of the related benefit	🟢	Blood pressure (High tier, first benefit in the ER) → vessel widening (High tier, second) → cardiovascular death (Medium tier).
11.3	If less that three distinct time-to-effect aspects are mentioned in the ER the unused sets are left empty and made invisible, not filled with placeholder text or empty-state phrasing.	N/A	The ER supplies three distinct time-to-effect aspects, so all three sets are used.
11.4	All used [time_#label], [time#value], [time#_sub] items are filled with meaningful content derived from the ER.	🟢	All nine spans populated; the sub-lines reproduce ER line 421 near-verbatim (“2–8 weeks”, “~2 hours”, “Years”).
11.5	If the ER does not provide any information on time to effect, the section is removed completely from the `Protocol Panel`	N/A	The ER does provide time-to-effect information (line 421).

12. Benefits

#	Description	Result	Comments
12.1	The section is derived from the ER `Expected Benefits` section	🟢	All ten items are the ER’s own benefit sub-headings from lines 144–212.
12.2	Key variables are [benefits_high], [benefits_medium], [benefits_low], [benefits_speculative]	🟢	All four spans present and populated at lines 542–562.
12.3	Items are as concise as possible. No explanations, no elaborations, no effect sizes, no qualifiers, no attributions, no citations, no study details, no mechanistic explanations, etc. Just the key fact.	🟢	Bare heading phrases only; no Magnitude figures, trial names or mechanism text carried across.
12.4	Parenthetical content — including effect sizes, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved.	🟢	No parentheses occur in any benefits span; the ER’s “⚠️ Conflicted” markers are also dropped.
12.5	If no items of a specific sub-section (high, medium, low, speculative) are present the respective is set to “display=none”, not filled with “None documented in human trials to date” or similar empty-state phrasing.	N/A	All four ER benefit tiers contain items, so no span needs hiding.

13. Risks

#	Description	Result	Comments
13.1	The section is derived from the ER `Potential Risks & Side Effects` section	🟢	All ten items are the ER’s own risk sub-headings from lines 240–302.
13.2	Key variables are [risks_high], [risks_medium], [risks_low], [risks_speculative]	🟢	All four spans present and populated at lines 617–635.
13.3	Items are as concise as possible. No explanations, no elaborations, no effect sizes, no qualifiers, no attributions, no citations, no study details, no mechanistic explanations, etc. Just the key fact.	🟢	Bare heading phrases only; the 1.0% vs 0.4% incidence and other Magnitude figures are not carried across.
13.4	Parenthetical content — including frequencies, severity grades, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved.	🟢	No parentheses occur in any risks span; the ER’s “⚠️ Conflicted” markers are also dropped.
13.5	If no items of a specific sub-section (high, medium, low, speculative) are present the respective is set to “display=none”, not filled with “None documented in human trials to date” or similar empty-state phrasing.	N/A	All four ER risk tiers contain items, so no span needs hiding.

14. Monitoring

#	Description	Result	Comments
14.1	The section is derived from the ER `Monitoring` section	🟢	All rows derive from the ER `Monitoring Protocol & Defining Success` table, lines 453–464.
14.2	All measurable/quantifiable biomarkers from the `Monitoring` section are listed	🟢	All 12 ER table rows are present in the same order, with Target and Why columns reproduced verbatim (e.g., ferritin “50–100 ng/mL in men, 40–70 ng/mL in women”; eGFR “Above 90 mL/min/1.73 m²”).
14.3	[monitoring_cadence] is populated with the monitoring cadence/frequency derived from the ER `Monitoring` section. It is not left with placeholder text or empty.	🟢	Line 812 condenses ER line 449: four and eight weeks, three months, then six to twelve months, metals annually.

15. Qualitative Assessment

#	Description	Result	Comments
15.1	The section is derived from the ER `Monitoring` section	🟢	All six items come from the ER’s “Qualitative markers worth tracking” list, lines 468–473.
15.2	All subjective/qualitative biomarkers from the `Monitoring` section are listed	🟢	All six ER qualitative bullets present in order; only the glossary parenthetical defining claudication is trimmed for the one-page budget.

Issues 07/09/2026 08:34

Pass rate 100.00%. No issues found.