Audit: QRS - Huperzine A for Health & Longevity

Audit conducted on 10/09/2026 08:44 using AI4L / Opus 5

Iterations

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: at-a-glance to Conclusion; protocol cells to Therapeutic Protocol; time cells to Practical Considerations and Therapeutic Protocol; gates to Key Interactions & Contraindications; tiers to Expected Benefits / Potential Risks & Side Effects; markers and cadence to 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.	🟢	Cautious framing carried through: “Rests on tolerance reasoning, not on measured loss of response” (line 484), “No established target” (line 767), “the human evidence points both ways” (line 436).
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”).	🟢	Absolute contraindications stay in the stop gate (pregnancy/breastfeeding line 586; unsupervised cholinesterase-inhibitor combination line 592); cycling stays explicitly non-default (line 484).
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.	🟢	No Benefit-Modifying Factors or Risk-Modifying Factors content appears in the gates; the two ER interactions graded “absolute contraindication” are placed in Contraindications, which item 9.2 explicitly anticipates.
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, expert names or brand names appear anywhere in the QRS; “in one trial” (line 818) mirrors the ER’s own “one trial” at ER line 438.
1.6	The QRS does not introduce new attributions.	🟢	The ER’s attributions (Chris Kresser, Examine, Life Extension) are dropped rather than replaced; no new attribution is introduced.

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.	🟢	Sober, evidence-weighted register matching the ER, including its scepticism about the evidence base (“the human evidence points both ways”, “the product matters more than the dose”).
2.2	The tone of the QRS is simultaneously expert, accessible, objective, and data-driven, but also empowering and encouraging	🟢	Quantified targets and doses throughout, expressed in plain terms; framing is enabling (“Where long-term use is weighed, the product matters more than the dose”) rather than discouraging.
2.3	The QRS reads as a trusted, knowledgeable guide rather than a prescriptive doctor	🟢	Statements are descriptive (“Protocols open at 50 micrograms once daily for a week”, “A single morning dose is standard at supplement doses”), not directives.
2.4	The QRS avoids language that implies medical or clinical advice	🟢	No imperative or prescriptive constructions; the footer disclaimer is the template’s own.
2.5	The QRS “presents information” instead of “providing guidance”, “recommending”, or “advising”	🟢	No instance of “recommend”, “advise”, “should” or “must” in the populated content.
2.6	The QRS never addresses “the reader” directly — it presents evidence, not guidance	🟢	No second-person pronouns occur anywhere in the document.
2.7	The QRS is written in plain language, avoiding unnecessary medical jargon	🟢	Technical terms are given in plain form where the ER does so (“estimated kidney filtering rate”, line 581; “the brain’s main learning-and-memory messenger”, line 434).
2.8	Information is presented in a concise and very compact manner	🟢	Gate items are single clauses, tier lines are bare noun phrases, and marker rows are trimmed to name/target/why.
2.9	It DOES NOT address the reader directly	🟢	Confirmed: no “you”, “your”, “we” or “our” in the document.
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 supplement-dose range is foregrounded over the clinical dementia dose, and the at-a-glance leads with the intact-memory question relevant to this 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.	🟢	Daily heart-rate tracking, a baseline electrocardiogram, laboratory panels and cognitive retesting at 8 and 16 weeks 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.	🟢	The monitoring panel and cadence assume an engaged, self-directed user rather than a casual consumer.
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 split signal is made explicit: benefits are High in clinically impaired populations but Low in cognitively healthy people, and the at-a-glance states the intact-memory evidence “points both ways”.
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 title 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)”; “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.	🟢	Formal terms used throughout: “atrioventricular block”, “depolarising neuromuscular blockade”, “cholinergic adverse effects”, “bronchoconstriction”. No route-of-administration colloquialism 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 fixed strings are byte-identical to the template: “Protocol” (445), “Time to effect” (491), “Benefits” (541), “Risk & Side Effects” (624), “Monitoring” (652), “Qualitative Assessment” (791), “Contraindications” (570), “Key Interactions” (599), the four tier labels, and “Marker”/”Target”/”Why” (656-658).
3.2	All “…” from the [qrs_template] are present in the the QRS.	🟢	All 34 template variables are present; the repeatable marker_#_* row and qualitative_item_# are instantiated 8 and 5 times respectively.
3.3	Spans that are not addressed in a checklist item are left unchanged	🟢	A structural diff against the template shows differences confined to the metadata block, the title, and the populated variable spans; stylesheet, layout, website= spans and footer are unchanged.

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 that feeds the QRS is empty; every benefit and risk tier, both gate lists, the protocol, the monitoring table and the qualitative list are populated in the ER.
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 supplement dose” (449), “Best time of day” (463) and “Integrative cycling approach” (477) reproduce the ER bold labels at ER lines 332, 340 and 336 verbatim.
4.3	Labels are not paraphrased, abbreviated, or invented.	🟢	Monitoring marker names reproduce the ER biomarker column verbatim; the three time-to-effect labels are lifted from ER wording (“Acute cholinergic effect”, “Cognitive change(s)”, “everyday function”).
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 in the file; the ER’s “⚠️ Conflicted” marker on the low-tier benefit was 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.	🟢	Content is condensed to the per-section budget: gate items are single clauses with glosses stripped, tier lines are semicolon-joined noun phrases, marker rows are trimmed to the ER’s target and reason with the Context/Notes column dropped entirely, and protocol subs are held to two short sentences.

---

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 hold the metadata comment immediately after <!doctype html> on line 1, ahead of every other comment and element.
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.	🟢	Line 3 opens and line 13 closes the block; the preamble text on line 2 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 sits wholly inside an HTML comment, and no metadata value is 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.	🟢	All values are trimmed and unquoted except duration: "00:03", which contains a colon and therefore requires quoting.
5.5	The filename of the source ER is stated as “er_filename: [er_filename]”	🟢	Line 4: er_filename: huperzine_a_2026-0910-0558_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: 2026-0910-0831, correctly formatted.
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 carrying 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 trailing qualifier.
5.12	The filename of the document is stated as “qrs_filename: [filename of this document]”	🟢	Line 9: qrs_filename: huperzine_a_2026-0910-0558_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, including the appended git_user: evipedia-3 and git_issue: 5990, which are unquoted and untrimmed of nothing.

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: Huperzine A for Health & Longevity - Quick Reference Sheet, matching the ER canonical_topic with the ampersand entity-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: Huperzine A for Health & Longevity, correctly encoded.
6.3	[header_subline_date] is set to [qrs_creation_date reformatted as MM/DD/YYYY]	🟢	Line 421: 09/10/2026, the correct MM/DD/YYYY rendering of 2026-0910-0831.
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 holds only the title and the template subline; the ER’s “Also known as” line and all version/audit markers are absent.

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 (ER lines 458-462): mechanism, the impaired-versus-intact split, the mild dose-related safety picture, and product over dose.
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 has a distinct source: ER 458 (mechanism, gains in the impaired, two directions in the intact), ER 227 and 462 (mild and dose-related), ER 462 (product rather than dose).
7.4	It DOES NOT use acronyms or technical classifications that require specialist knowledge, uses plain-language terms instead	🟢	Acetylcholinesterase and acetylcholine are rendered as “the enzyme clearing the brain’s main learning-and-memory messenger”; no acronym or classification appears.
7.5	It DOES NOT cite specific trials (names, years, sample sizes, p-values)	🟢	No trial name, year, sample size or p-value appears.
7.6	It DOES NOT cite effect sizes, relative risks, or statistical results	🟢	No numeric result appears; the ER’s weighted mean differences and odds ratio are all excluded.

8. Contraindications

#	Description	Result	Comments
8.1	The section is derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section	🟢	All nine items trace to ER lines 281-308, that section’s interaction bullets and its “Populations who should avoid Huperzine A” list.
8.2	[stop_items] represent the Contraindications from the ER	🟢	All eight ER avoid-list populations are carried, plus the ER’s ninth absolute contraindication, unsupervised combination with cholinesterase inhibitors (ER line 281).
8.3	Individual [stop_items] are formatted as <li></li>	🟢	Nine discrete <li> elements at lines 573-594, all inside the stop_items 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.	🟢	Explanatory glosses are stripped (“a failing natural pacemaker”, “in whom exposure is unpredictable”, “for whom no safety data exist”, “breathless at rest”); no dash-trailing clause survives.
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).	🟢	Every decision-relevant qualifier survives: heart rate below 50 bpm, second/third-degree block, stage III or above, below 45 mL/min/1.73 m², 3-5 days pre-surgery, within 90 days, NYHA Class IV.
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 section is populated, which is correct: the ER names eight such populations plus two absolute-contraindication scenarios.
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 seven items trace to the ER interaction bullets at ER lines 283-297.
9.2	[caution_items] represent the Key Interactions from the ER, excluding any that are already listed as Contraindications	🟢	Seven of the ER’s nine interactions appear; the two graded absolute contraindications (cholinesterase inhibitors, depolarising neuromuscular blockers) are correctly excluded here and carried in the stop gate instead.
9.3	Individual [caution_items] are formatted as <li></li>	🟢	Seven discrete <li> elements at lines 602-614 inside the caution_items 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.	🟢	The ER’s Severity / Consequence / Mitigation clauses are stripped from every item; each entry is the agent class alone.
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 preserved verbatim, including the botanical list with its italics (lines 611-612).
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 bullets use no ranking notation inside parentheses; the parenthetical content is plain comma-separated drug 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 section is populated, which is correct: the ER documents nine interactions.
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 ER lines 332, 336, 340, 342 and 344.
10.2	The three sets of [action] items cover the three most important actionable implementation aspects from the ER Protocol section	🟢	Dose, timing and cycling are the three decisions a self-directed user must make; the clinical dementia dose and the genetic, sex, age and comorbidity bullets are secondary for this audience.
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 Therapeutic Protocol section carries twelve bullets, well above three, so no set is unused.
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 are populated with substantive content; each label and value is verbatim ER Therapeutic Protocol material, and the subs add the ER’s own dose comparison, half-life reasoning and cycling caveat.

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	🟢	Cognitive change at 4-8 weeks, everyday function at 6 weeks, and the acute cholinergic effect at about 1 hour are the only three onset windows the ER quantifies.
11.2	The sets are picked and ordered by the magnitude of the related benefit	🟢	Ordered by benefit tier: the two High-tier benefits first (cognitive function, then independence in everyday activities), with the pharmacological acute effect last.
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 no set is unused.
11.4	All used [time_#label], [time#value], [time#_sub] items are filled with meaningful content derived from the ER.	🟢	All nine spans are populated; values and subs track ER lines 387 (4-8 weeks, 12-16 weeks, acute effect), 163 (6, 12 and 16 weeks) and 342 (5-10 minutes, peak near one hour).
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 section is correctly retained.

12. Benefits

#	Description	Result	Comments
12.1	The section is derived from the ER Expected Benefits section	🟢	All eight entries reproduce the ER Expected Benefits subheadings at ER lines 155-201.
12.2	Key variables are [benefits_high], [benefits_medium], [benefits_low], [benefits_speculative]	🟢	All four spans are present and populated at lines 543-563.
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 tier is a semicolon-joined list of bare benefit names; the ER’s Magnitude figures (2.81 MMSE points, −7.17 ADL points, odds ratio 4.32) are all excluded.
12.4	Parenthetical content — including effect sizes, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved.	🟢	The ER’s parenthetical glosses on the benefit headings and the “⚠️ Conflicted” marker on the low-tier memory item are stripped.
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 carry 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 entries reproduce the ER Potential Risks & Side Effects subheadings at ER lines 225-261.
13.2	Key variables are [risks_high], [risks_medium], [risks_low], [risks_speculative]	🟢	All four spans are present and populated at lines 626-646.
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 tier is a bare risk name; the ER’s Magnitude figures (3% ankle oedema, 267.1 micrograms per serving, 9 of 22 products) are all excluded.
13.4	Parenthetical content — including frequencies, severity grades, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved.	🟢	The ER’s parenthetical glosses (“an abnormally slow heart rate”, “long-term airway narrowing”) are stripped from the tier lines.
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 carry items, so no span needs hiding.

14. Monitoring

#	Description	Result	Comments
14.1	The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section	🟢	The table reproduces the ER Monitoring Protocol & Defining Success biomarker table at ER lines 421-430.
14.2	All measurable/quantifiable biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed	🟢	All eight ER biomarkers are present in ER order: resting heart rate, electrocardiogram PR interval, estimated glomerular filtration rate, serum creatinine, alanine aminotransferase, complete blood count, blood pressure, and sleep onset and night awakenings.
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 781-785 carry the ER’s cadence from ER line 419: daily resting heart rate for two weeks and after each dose increase, laboratory panel at 3 months then every 6-12 months, cognitive retesting at 8 and 16 weeks.

15. Qualitative Assessment

#	Description	Result	Comments
15.1	The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section	🟢	All five items reproduce the ER’s “Qualitative markers worth tracking alongside the panel” list at ER lines 434-438.
15.2	All subjective/qualitative biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed	🟢	All five ER qualitative markers are carried: word-finding fluency, sustained attention, dream vividness, cholinergic symptom load, and post-exercise subjective difficulty.

Issues 10/09/2026 08:44

Pass rate 100.00%. No issues found.

Issues 10/09/2026 08:38

1. 2.5 / 2.6 / 2.9 — Imperative addresses the reader: [action_1_sub] (lines 456-457) closes with “Start at 50 micrograms once daily for a week.”, a direct instruction to the reader; the ER states this descriptively as “Protocols open at 50 micrograms once daily for a week before 100 micrograms is considered”.
2. 12.3 / 12.4 — Parenthetical qualifier not stripped: [benefits_low] (line 554) keeps “(conflicted)” after “Memory and cognitive performance in cognitively healthy people”, although the Low tier already encodes evidence strength and parenthetical content must be stripped.

Fixes 10/09/2026 08:38

1. 2.5 / 2.6 / 2.9 — Imperative removed from dose cell: Changed [action_1_sub] from “Start at 50 micrograms once daily for a week.” to the ER’s descriptive phrasing “Protocols open at 50 micrograms once daily for a week.”
2. 12.3 / 12.4 — Parenthetical qualifier stripped: Removed “(conflicted)” from the [benefits_low] item “Memory and cognitive performance in cognitively healthy people”.