Audit: QRS - DGL for Health & Longevity

Audit conducted on 20/09/2026 05:16 using AI4L / Opus 5

Iterations

Summary

Items	Count
Total	93
Passed	85
Failed	0
N/A	8
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.	🟢	Protocol doses, time-to-effect windows, gate items, benefit/risk tiers, all eight biomarkers and all six qualitative markers trace to Therapeutic Protocol, Practical Considerations, Key Interactions & Contraindications, Expected Benefits, Potential Risks & Side Effects and Monitoring Protocol & Defining Success.
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.	🟢	The ER’s conflicted reading of ulcer healing is carried into [at_a_glance] as “ulcer healing is conflicted”; the ER’s “suppression is not the same as clearing the infection” is carried as “suppressed, not cleared”.
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”).	🟢	Pregnancy and breastfeeding remain contraindications, not cautions; the Helicobacter pylori claim remains load reduction rather than eradication.
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.	🟢	Contraindications come only from the ER’s “Populations who should avoid DGL” list; Key Interactions come only from the ER’s interaction bullets; no Benefit- or Risk-Modifying Factor is promoted into a gate.
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 carries no PMIDs, author names, NCT identifiers or brand names anywhere.
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.	🟢	Matches the ER’s measured, qualification-forward register, including the ER’s own framing that the harm tracks residual glycyrrhizin.
2.2	The tone of the QRS is simultaneously expert, accessible, objective, and data-driven, but also empowering and encouraging	🟢	Dose ranges, time windows and biomarker targets are given concretely while limitations are stated plainly.
2.3	The QRS reads as a trusted, knowledgeable guide rather than a prescriptive doctor	🟢	Content is stated descriptively (“Chewable formats”, “Trialled over 30 days”) rather than as instruction to a patient.
2.4	The QRS avoids language that implies medical or clinical advice	🟢	No “should”, “must” or “take” constructions; the Cadence field states the ER’s monitoring schedule as fact.
2.5	The QRS “presents information” instead of “providing guidance”, “recommending”, or “advising”	🟢	Every field is a statement of what the evidence or the trials did.
2.6	The QRS never addresses “the reader” directly — it presents evidence, not guidance	🟢	No second-person pronouns appear anywhere in the document body.
2.7	The QRS is written in plain language, avoiding unnecessary medical jargon	🟢	Technical terms are confined to the decision gates and biomarker table where the ER’s own wording must be preserved; the lede is in plain terms.
2.8	Information is presented in a concise and very compact manner	🟢	Gate items are bare facts, benefit and risk tiers are semicolon-joined phrases, and subs are one or two short sentences.
2.9	It DOES NOT address the reader directly	🟢	Confirmed: no direct address in header, lede, protocol, gates, cards or cadence.
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.	🟢	The sheet assumes willingness to measure potassium, sodium, renin and aldosterone and to log home blood pressure.
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.	🟢	Three-times-daily pre-meal chewable dosing and a seven-biomarker panel are presented without hedging on effort.
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.	🟢	No simplified “ask your doctor” framing; the sheet expects laboratory follow-up.
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] closes on the product-quality and potassium signal, which is the decision-relevant point for a self-directed user.
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.	🟢	“Longevity” appears only in the canonical topic; “anti-aging” appears nowhere.
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)”; “oral” / “administered orally” not “taken by mouth” / “given by mouth”; “injection” not “shot”; “adverse event” not “bad reaction”). This holds on EVERY surface, including the QRS lede — the stricter plain-language bar (see 2.7) does not license lay phrasing for route of administration. Direct quotes from sources are exempt.	🟢	Formats are named as “chewable” and “capsules of standardised extract”; no “pill”, “shot” or “by mouth” phrasing appears.

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 column headers match [qrs_template] character for character.
3.2	All “…” from the [qrs_template] are present in the the QRS.	🟢	page_title, header_topic, header_subline_date, header_subline_model, at_a_glance, action_1–3 × label/value/sub, time_1–3 × label/value/sub, benefits_×4, stop_items, caution_items, risks_×4, marker_1–8 × name/target/why, monitoring_cadence and qualitative_item_1–6 are all present.
3.3	Spans that are not addressed in a checklist item are left unchanged	🟢	<span website="evidence_review">Evidence Review</span>, <span website="audit"></span> and <span website="full_review"></span> are unchanged from the template.

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 drawn on by 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.	🟢	“Standardised extract dose”, “Classic chewable dose” and “Best time of day” are the ER’s bold Protocol labels verbatim; biomarker names match the ER table’s Biomarker column verbatim.
4.3	Labels are not paraphrased, abbreviated, or invented.	🟢	Where an ER label exists it is reproduced; the Time to effect labels are derived from the ER’s single “Time to effect” bullet, which supplies no per-cell labels.
4.4	The QRS DOES NOT use emoji indicators (no 🟩, 🟥, 🟨, etc.). Color and emphasis are conveyed through CSS and bold labels.	🟢	No emoji anywhere in the HTML source; the ER’s 🟩/🟥/🟨 and ⚠️ markers were correctly dropped.
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 well below ER length: 12 ER Protocol bullets reduced to 3 cells, ER rationale and mitigation clauses stripped from all 17 gate items, and benefit/risk entries reduced to bare headings.

---

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.	🟢	Lines 2–14: the metadata comment immediately follows <!doctype html> and precedes the blank-template comment and <html>.
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 “QRS — Metadata” text precedes the opening delimiter.
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.	🟢	It is inside an HTML comment and no sheet element repeats its values.
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.	🟢	Only duration: "00:03" is quoted, which is required because the value contains a colon.
5.5	The filename of the source ER is stated as “er_filename: [er_filename]”	🟢	Line 4: er_filename: dgl_2026-0920-0140_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: 26.9.11, 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: 2026-0920-0511.
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 with no qualifier.
5.12	The filename of the document is stated as “qrs_filename: [filename of this document]”	🟢	Line 9: qrs_filename: dgl_2026-0920-0140_Opus_QRS.html, matching the file on disk.
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 plus the tooling-added duration, git_user and git_issue.

6. Page Title & Header

#	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: DGL for Health & Longevity - Quick Reference Sheet, matching the ER’s canonical_topic.
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: DGL for Health & Longevity.
6.3	[header_subline_date] is set to [qrs_creation_date reformatted as MM/DD/YYYY]	🟢	Line 421: 09/20/2026, the correct reformatting of 2026-0920-0511.
6.4	[header_subline_model] is set to [qrs_creator_ai_fullname]	🟢	Line 425: Opus 5.
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 standard subline; the ER’s alternate-names line was 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	🟢	All four sentences map onto the ER Conclusion paragraphs: mechanism, best-supported effect, bacterial load and ulcer conflict, product content and potassium signal.
7.2	[at_a_glance] is no longer than 60 words	🟢	Exactly 60 words.
7.3	Every fact in [at_a_glance] is supported by a distinct passage in the ER.	🟢	Each clause maps to a distinct Conclusion passage; nothing is asserted that the ER does not state.
7.4	It DOES NOT use acronyms or technical classifications that require specialist knowledge, uses plain-language terms instead	🟢	Glycyrrhizin is rendered as “the sweet, blood-pressure-raising compound”; no acronym, no “pseudohyperaldosteronism”, no “11β-HSD2”, no “GERD”.
7.5	It DOES NOT cite specific trials (names, years, sample sizes, p-values)	🟢	No author names, years, sample sizes or p-values appear.
7.6	It DOES NOT cite effect sizes, relative risks, or statistical results	🟢	No mmHg figures, percentages or confidence intervals appear.

8. Contraindications

#	Description	Result	Comments
8.1	The section is derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section	🟢	All eight items come from the “Populations who should avoid DGL” list in that ER section.
8.2	[stop_items] represent the Contraindications from the ER	🟢	All eight ER avoidance populations are represented, none added and none dropped.
8.3	Individual [stop_items] are formatted as <li></li>	🟢	Lines 571–578: eight discrete <li> elements inside the span.
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.	🟢	The ER’s trailing rationale clauses (“given the association of licorice intake with preterm delivery…”, “where glycyrrhizin is detectable in milk…”, “from any cause”) are stripped; no dash-trailing content remains.
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).	🟢	“above 140/90 mmHg”, “NYHA Class III or IV”, “below 3.5 mmol/L”, “stage 3b or worse, below 45 mL/min/1.73 m²” and “including Conn’s syndrome” 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.	🟢	The ER uses no ranking notation in these bullets; the CKD item is normalised to a plain comma-separated form.
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 eight avoidance populations and the section is correctly populated rather than left 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 left empty.

9. Key Interactions

#	Description	Result	Comments
9.1	The section is derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section	🟢	All nine items come from the interaction bullets of that ER section.
9.2	[caution_items] represent the Key Interactions from the ER, excluding any that are already listed as Contraindications	🟢	All nine ER interaction bullets are present and none duplicates a contraindication.
9.3	Individual [caution_items] are formatted as <li></li>	🟢	Lines 586–599: nine discrete <li> elements inside the span.
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.	🟢	Severity words (“Caution”, “Monitor”), mechanism sentences and every “Mitigation:” clause are stripped; only the bold label survives.
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 ER example-drug list is retained, including the CYP3A4 item, where only the parenthetical enzyme definition is trimmed and “statins, calcium-channel blockers, ciclosporin” is kept.
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.	🟢	The ER uses no ranking symbols; all parentheticals are already plain comma-separated lists.
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 names nine interactions and the section is correctly populated rather than left 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 left 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, with the chewing point drawn from “Chewing matters for chewables”.
10.2	The three sets of [action] items cover the three most important actionable implementation aspects from the ER Protocol section	🟢	The two dosing regimens and the pre-meal timing are the only bullets in that section that specify an executable quantity or schedule.
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 and 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.	🟢	Lines 450–487: 75 mg twice daily, 380–800 mg three times daily and 15–20 min before meals, each with an ER-sourced sub.

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	🟢	The ER’s Practical Considerations “Time to effect” bullet names exactly three windows — 7–15 days, day 30, and 60 days — and all three are carried.
11.2	The sets are picked and ordered by the magnitude of the related benefit	🟢	The two symptom windows (High-tier benefit) precede the Helicobacter pylori load window (Medium-tier benefit).
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 and 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.	🟢	Lines 498–533: “7–15 days”, “By day 30” and “60 days”, each with an ER-sourced sub including “Nothing here acts within hours”.
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, so the section is correctly retained.

12. Benefits

#	Description	Result	Comments
12.1	The section is derived from the ER Expected Benefits section	🟢	All eight entries correspond to the eight #### benefit headings in that ER section.
12.2	Key variables are [benefits_high], [benefits_medium], [benefits_low], [benefits_speculative]	🟢	All four spans are present and correctly tiered against the ER’s High/Medium/Low/Speculative groupings.
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.	🟢	Each entry is the ER heading alone; no Magnitude figures, trial counts or the ER’s “⚠️ Conflicted” qualifier are carried.
12.4	Parenthetical content — including effect sizes, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved.	🟢	The ER’s inline glosses (“indigestion with no ulcer found”, “small recurrent mouth sores”) are absent.
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 tiers contain items in the ER, so no span needed hiding.

13. Risks

#	Description	Result	Comments
13.1	The section is derived from the ER Potential Risks & Side Effects section	🟢	All seven entries correspond to the seven #### risk headings in that ER section.
13.2	Key variables are [risks_high], [risks_medium], [risks_low], [risks_speculative]	🟢	All four spans are present and correctly tiered against the ER’s High/Medium/Low/Speculative groupings.
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.	🟢	Each entry is the ER heading alone; the 5.45 mmHg, 0.33 mmol/L and 7-point figures and the “⚠️ Conflicted” markers are absent.
13.4	Parenthetical content — including frequencies, severity grades, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved.	🟢	The ER’s parenthetical glosses on 11β-HSD2 and pseudohyperaldosteronism are not carried into the risk list.
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 tiers contain items in the ER, so no span needed hiding.

14. Monitoring

#	Description	Result	Comments
14.1	The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section	🟢	The table and cadence derive from the ER Monitoring Protocol & Defining Success section.
14.2	All measurable/quantifiable biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed	🟢	All eight ER biomarker rows are present — potassium, sodium, home blood pressure, magnesium, plasma renin activity, aldosterone, eGFR and the Helicobacter pylori stool antigen or urea breath test — with Target and Why reproduced from the ER columns.
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.	🟢	Lines 756–761 reproduce the ER’s second monitoring paragraph: daily home blood pressure for four weeks then weekly, potassium and sodium at baseline, four and twelve weeks, kidney function every six to twelve months.

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 to track alongside the laboratory values” list.
15.2	All subjective/qualitative biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed	🟢	All six ER qualitative markers are carried verbatim as qualitative_item_1 through qualitative_item_6.

Issues 20/09/2026 05:16

Pass rate 100.00%. No issues found.