Audit: QRS - Guar Gum for Health & Longevity

Audit conducted on 19/08/2026 02:57 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 `Therapeutic Protocol`, time cells to `Practical Considerations`, benefit/risk tiers to the ER tier headings, gates to `Key Interactions & Contraindications`, monitoring rows to the ER biomarker table.
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” markers on glycemic control, appetite suppression and mineral absorption are carried as “(conflicted)” (lines 540, 548, 608); “Speculative” tiers are preserved as such.
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”).	🟢	Contraindications keep “Anyone with…” force; Caution/Monitor severity words match the ER bullets one-for-one; “avoidable” in at-a-glance mirrors the ER Conclusion’s “avoidable rather than unavoidable”.
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 `Benefit-Modifying Factors` or `Risk-Modifying Factors` appears in the gates or risk card; gates draw only from `Key Interactions & Contraindications`.
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.	🟢	No PMIDs, NCT identifiers, author names or brand names (Sunfiber, OptiFibre, NOW Foods) appear anywhere in the QRS.
1.6	The QRS does not introduce new attributions.	🟢	No attributions beyond the template’s AI4L / model line in the subline.

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.	🟢	Neutral, evidence-first register matching the ER throughout.
2.2	The tone of the QRS is simultaneously expert, accessible, objective, and data-driven, but also empowering and encouraging	🟢	Technical terms are used where the ER uses them, while the at-a-glance and time-to-effect cells stay plain and actionable.
2.3	The QRS reads as a trusted, knowledgeable guide rather than a prescriptive doctor	🟢	Protocol cells describe the trial regimens (“the regimen used across the diabetes and lipid trials”) rather than instructing.
2.4	The QRS avoids language that implies medical or clinical advice	🟢	No imperative clinical instruction; the only “must” (line 484) is a physical statement about the gel, taken verbatim from the ER.
2.5	The QRS “presents information” instead of “providing guidance”, “recommending”, or “advising”	🟢	No instances of “recommend”, “advise”, “you should” or equivalent.
2.6	The QRS never addresses “the reader” directly — it presents evidence, not guidance	🟢	No second-person pronouns; marker_1_target uses “for those optimizing cardiovascular risk”, not “you”.
2.7	The QRS is written in plain language, avoiding unnecessary medical jargon	🟢	Acronyms are spelled out (“hemoglobin A1c”, “apolipoprotein B”, “immunoglobulin E”); remaining clinical terms are required by the gate items they qualify.
2.8	Information is presented in a concise and very compact manner	🟢	Every ER bullet is reduced to a phrase; gate items carry no mechanistic rationale.
2.9	It DOES NOT address the reader directly	🟢	Confirmed — no direct address anywhere in the body.
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 (LDL < 70 mg/dL, apolipoprotein B < 60 mg/dL, fasting insulin 2–5 µIU/mL) are the optimizer-tier targets, not conventional cut-offs.
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 dosing and a seven-marker monitoring panel are presented without hedging on burden.
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 “just take a supplement” framing; the two distinct forms and their non-interchangeability are made explicit.
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.	🟢	The at-a-glance leads with the lipid effect and explicitly negates weight loss, matching the ER’s weighting for an optimizing reader.
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)”; “injection” not “shot”; “adverse event” not “bad reaction”). Direct quotes from sources are exempt.	🟢	“Oral medications”, “oral antibiotics”, “mineral supplements”, “abdominal pain” — all formal; no consumer-grade substitutes.

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 present verbatim at lines 445, 491, 533, 594, 619, 720 (cards), 560 and 572 (gates), 536–552 and 597–612 (tiers), 623–625 (table headers).
3.2	All “…” from the [qrs_template] are present in the the QRS.	🟢	61 variable spans present, covering every variable named in this checklist: page_title, header_, at_a_glance, action_1–3 (label/value/sub), time_1–3 (label/value/sub), benefits_, stop_items, caution_items, risks_*, marker_1–7 (name/target/why), monitoring_cadence, qualitative_item_1–6.
3.3	Spans that are not addressed in a checklist item are left unchanged	🟢	The three template `<span website="…">` hooks (lines 423, 426, 439) are intact and unmodified; no unaddressed span carries injected content.

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; every benefit tier, risk tier, gate and monitoring row has ER content.
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.	🟢	ER “Viscous-gum protocol for lipids and glycemia:”, “Enzyme-treated protocol for gut function:” and “Best time of day:” are reused verbatim as action_1–3 labels; all ten interaction labels reuse the ER bold labels.
4.3	Labels are not paraphrased, abbreviated, or invented.	🟢	Monitoring marker names match the ER biomarker column verbatim; time-to-effect labels are lifted from the ER `Practical Considerations` sentence (“Lipid changes”, “hemoglobin A1c”, “Stool form and bloating”).
4.4	The QRS DOES NOT use emoji indicators (no 🟩, 🟥, 🟨, etc.). Color and emphasis are conveyed through CSS and bold labels.	🟢	No emoji characters in the file; tiers are conveyed by `<strong>` labels plus the `.benefits` / `.risks` CSS palettes.
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.	🟢	Each section is condensed rather than extended: the ER’s twelve protocol bullets reduce to three cells, the seven-row biomarker table drops the ER’s Context/Notes column, and gate items carry only the fact plus severity word.

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 comment opens immediately after `<!doctype html>` on line 1 and precedes the template comment on line 16.
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 descriptive text on line 2 sits before 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.	🟢	Enclosed in an HTML comment; none of the values are repeated in the header, footer or body.
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: "00:02"` is quoted, and it contains a colon requiring it; all other values are bare and trimmed.
5.5	The filename of the source ER is stated as “er_filename: [er_filename]”	🟢	Line 4: `er_filename: guar_gum_2026-0825-0115_Opus_ER.md`, matching the ER’s own `filename` frontmatter value.
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 version badge at the top of QRS.md.
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: 2026-0819-0249` — correct YYYY-MMDD-HHMM form.
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” — single word, 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” = nickname + version, no context-window or tier qualifier appended.
5.12	The filename of the document is stated as “qrs_filename: [filename of this document]”	🟢	Line 9: `qrs_filename: guar_gum_2026-0825-0115_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 ten keys; no stray whitespace or unnecessary quoting.

#	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: `Guar Gum for Health & Longevity - Quick Reference Sheet`, matching ER `canonical_topic` with the ampersand 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: `Guar Gum for Health & Longevity`.
6.3	[header_subline_date] is set to [qrs_creation_date reformatted as MM/DD/YYYY]	🟢	Line 421: `08/19/2026`, the correct MM/DD/YYYY rendering of `2026-0819-0249`.
6.4	[header_subline_model] is set to [qrs_creator_ai_fullname]	🟢	Line 425: `Opus 5`, matching the frontmatter `qrs_creator_ai_fullname`.
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 holds only the title and the template subline; the ER’s `alternate_names` list is not reproduced.

7. At-A-Glance Section

#	Description	Result	Comments
7.1	[at_a_glance] is dense, execution-oriented summary of the ER `Conclusion` section	🟢	Lines 434–437 track the ER Conclusion in order: identity, lipid effect, glycemic disagreement, enzyme-treated gut effects, no weight loss, harms.
7.2	[at_a_glance] is no longer than 60 words	🟢	54 words.
7.3	Every fact in [at_a_glance] is supported by a distinct passage in the ER.	🟢	Each clause maps to a distinct ER Conclusion sentence (ER lines 452 and 454).
7.4	It DOES NOT use acronyms or technical classifications that require specialist knowledge, uses plain-language terms instead	🟢	Uses “harmful cholesterol” for LDL, “enzyme-treated version” for PHGG, “blockage” for obstruction, “reduced medication uptake” for altered absorption.
7.5	It DOES NOT cite specific trials (names, years, sample sizes, p-values)	🟢	No study names, years, sample sizes or p-values.
7.6	It DOES NOT cite effect sizes, relative risks, or statistical results	🟢	Effects are qualitative (“a meaningful drop”, “findings disagree”); no numbers appear.

8. Contraindications

#	Description	Result	Comments
8.1	The section is derived from the ER `Key Interactions & Contraindications` section	🟢	All five items come from the ER’s “Populations who should avoid Guar Gum” list (ER lines 310–314).
8.2	[stop_items] represent the Contraindications from the ER	🟢	All five ER avoid-populations are represented, none added.
8.3	Individual [stop_items] are formatted as <li></li>	🟢	Lines 563–567, five well-formed `<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 leading “Anyone with…” is dropped and no dash-trailing clause survives; each item is a bare condition.
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).	🟢	Severity class (“requiring a texture-modified diet”), threshold (“more than 10% gastric retention at four hours on scintigraphy”), staging (“stricturing Crohn’s phenotype”) and time window (“until bowel function is confirmed”) 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’s contraindication list uses no ranking notation inside parentheses.
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 five such populations and the section is correctly populated rather than 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 ten items come from the ER’s interaction bullets (ER lines 288–306).
9.2	[caution_items] represent the Key Interactions from the ER, excluding any that are already listed as Contraindications	🟢	All ten ER interactions are present; none duplicates a contraindication.
9.3	Individual [caution_items] are formatted as <li></li>	🟢	Lines 575–584, ten well-formed `<li>` elements.
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 item is reduced to label plus severity word; the ER’s mechanism and separation-interval sentences are stripped and no dash-trailing clause remains.
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 (phenoxymethylpenicillin/amoxicillin/tetracyclines, glibenclamide/glipizide, psyllium/glucomannan/β-glucan, colesevelam/cholestyramine, etc.); only the plain-language glosses are trimmed.
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’s interaction parentheticals are plain comma-separated drug lists with no ranking notation.
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 ten interactions and the section is correctly populated.
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 (ER lines 336, 338, 344).
10.2	The three sets of [action] items cover the three most important actionable implementation aspects from the ER `Protocol` section	🟢	The two dose regimens (viscous and enzyme-treated) plus timing are the only directly executable bullets; the remainder of the ER section is background (competing approaches, popularizers, half-life) or 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; 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 carry ER-derived content: doses (15 g/day, 5–6 g/day), vehicle, timing and the trial provenance, none placeholder.

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	🟢	Lipids (4–8 weeks), hemoglobin A1c (8–12 weeks) and stool form/bloating (1–2 weeks) are the only three time-to-effect windows the ER states (ER line 389).
11.2	The sets are picked and ordered by the magnitude of the related benefit	🟢	Lipid changes first (the ER’s only High-tier benefit), then hemoglobin A1c and stool form, which are the ER’s first and second Medium-tier benefits in ER order.
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 states three distinct time-to-effect aspects; 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 value ranges match the ER’s “four to eight weeks”, “eight to twelve weeks” and “one to two weeks”.
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 provides time-to-effect information, so the row is correctly retained.

12. Benefits

#	Description	Result	Comments
12.1	The section is derived from the ER `Expected Benefits` section	🟢	All eight benefit entries map one-to-one onto the ER’s `Expected Benefits` sub-headings.
12.2	Key variables are [benefits_high], [benefits_medium], [benefits_low], [benefits_speculative]	🟢	All four spans present at lines 535, 538, 545, 551.
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 sub-heading reduced to sentence case; the ER’s Magnitude figures, mechanisms and trial descriptions are all dropped.
12.4	Parenthetical content — including effect sizes, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved.	🟢	No effect sizes, sample notes, mechanistic hints or example studies survive in parentheses; the only parenthetical is the ER’s own conflicted-evidence flag, which General Rules 1.2/1.3 require be carried through.
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 six risk entries map one-to-one onto the ER’s `Potential Risks & Side Effects` sub-headings.
13.2	Key variables are [risks_high], [risks_medium], [risks_low], [risks_speculative]	🟢	All four spans present at lines 596, 599, 605, 611.
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.	🟢	The ER’s 3% withdrawal figure, case-report detail and rodent-study description are all dropped; each entry is a bare descriptor.
13.4	Parenthetical content — including frequencies, severity grades, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved.	🟢	No frequencies, severity grades or study references remain in parentheses; the only parenthetical is the ER’s conflicted-evidence flag on mineral absorption, required by General Rules 1.2/1.3.
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	🟢	Rows and cadence derive from the ER `Monitoring Protocol & Defining Success` section (ER lines 413–425).
14.2	All measurable/quantifiable biomarkers from the `Monitoring` section are listed	🟢	All seven ER biomarkers present: LDL cholesterol, apolipoprotein B, hemoglobin A1c, fasting insulin, ferritin, serum zinc, Bristol Stool Form Scale — with targets and rationales verbatim.
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 710–714 condense the ER’s two cadence paragraphs: baseline, lipids/apolipoprotein B at eight weeks then six and twelve months, hemoglobin A1c at twelve weeks then six-monthly, ferritin and zinc at six months.

15. Qualitative Assessment

#	Description	Result	Comments
15.1	The section is derived from the ER `Monitoring` section	🟢	Taken from the ER’s “Qualitative markers worth tracking alongside the labs” list (ER lines 429–434).
15.2	All subjective/qualitative biomarkers from the `Monitoring` section are listed	🟢	All six ER qualitative markers are reproduced verbatim in the same order (lines 723–738).

Issues 19/08/2026 02:57

Pass rate 100.00%. No issues found.