Audit: QRS - ISRIB for Health & Longevity

Audit conducted on 04/09/2026 19:27 using AI4L / Opus 5

Iterations

Summary

Items	Count
Total	93
Passed	86
Failed	0
N/A	7
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.	🟢	All protocol cells, gate items, tier lists, marker rows and cadence text trace to ER lines 249–279, 299–319, 353, 381–402, 422–428.
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.	🟢	“No validated human protocol”, “Untested in humans”, “No human time course exists”, “reasoned from mechanism or animals” all mirror ER wording.
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; caution/monitor interactions stay in the caution gate.
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.	🟢	Gates draw only from Key Interactions & Contraindications; tiers only from Expected Benefits / Potential Risks & Side Effects; markers only from Monitoring Protocol & Defining Success.
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, no NCT IDs, no author names. Drug names (bortezomib, imatinib, azithromycin, etc.) all appear in ER lines 249–269 for the same facts.
1.6	The QRS does not introduce new attributions.	🟢	No attributions of any kind 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 sober, sceptical register throughout.
2.2	The tone of the QRS is simultaneously expert, accessible, objective, and data-driven, but also empowering and encouraging	🟢	Objective and data-driven; the negative balance is dictated by the source ER, not by the QRS voice.
2.3	The QRS reads as a trusted, knowledgeable guide rather than a prescriptive doctor	🟢	Presents ranges, thresholds and cadence as evidence, not as orders.
2.4	The QRS avoids language that implies medical or clinical advice	🟢	No imperative or prescriptive constructions in the populated variables.
2.5	The QRS “presents information” instead of “providing guidance”, “recommending”, or “advising”	🟢	No instance of “recommend”, “advise” or “should” in the document body.
2.6	The QRS never addresses “the reader” directly — it presents evidence, not guidance	🟢	No second-person pronouns anywhere in the file.
2.7	The QRS is written in plain language, avoiding unnecessary medical jargon	🟢	Technical terms are limited to biomarker names and named drug classes, both necessary.
2.8	Information is presented in a concise and very compact manner	🟢	Gate items are bare noun phrases; tier lists are semicolon-separated fragments; marker cells are single clauses.
2.9	It DOES NOT address the reader directly	🟢	Confirmed — no direct address.
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.	🟢	Framing assumes a reader weighing a research-chemical exposure against a blank human safety file.
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.	🟢	Ten-marker panel, twice-administered cognitive battery and repeated ECG assume a high-effort reader.
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.	🟢	Content depth and monitoring burden exclude a general-population framing.
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 places ISRIB “at the far speculative end”, which is the relevant signal for a longevity-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.	🟢	No occurrence of “anti-aging” or “anti-ageing”. 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)”; “injection” not “shot”; “adverse event” not “bad reaction”). Direct quotes from sources are exempt.	🟢	Body uses “ovarian reserve”, “cardiovascular effects”, “corrected QT interval”. The plainer register in At-A-Glance is required by item 7.4.

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 fourteen fixed strings byte-identical to [qrs_template] (QRS lines 445, 491, 539, 565, 583, 605, 629, 633–635, 758).
3.2	All “…” from the [qrs_template] are present in the the QRS.	🟢	Set comparison against the template returns no missing names; marker_#_* and qualitative_item_# are the template’s repeatable rows, expanded to 10 and 5 instances.
3.3	Spans that are not addressed in a checklist item are left unchanged	🟢	website="evidence_review", website="audit", website="full_review" unchanged (lines 423, 426, 439); head, CSS block and footer diff clean against 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”	🟢	No section governed by this item draws on an empty ER section; the empty benefit/risk tiers are handled under the more specific items 12.5 and 13.5.
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.	🟢	“Preclinical reference regimen” and “Single versus split dosing” reproduce ER bold labels (lines 301, 313) verbatim.
4.3	Labels are not paraphrased, abbreviated, or invented.	🟢	Marker names, tier labels and gate items carry ER wording; the Protocol and Time-to-effect cell labels without a 1:1 ER bold label derive directly from the ER text they summarise.
4.4	The QRS DOES NOT use emoji indicators (no 🟩, 🟥, 🟨, etc.). Color and emphasis are conveyed through CSS and bold labels.	🟢	No emoji present; the ER’s “⚠️ Conflicted” markers were correctly stripped.
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.	🟢	Estimated stacked height fits the A4 print box at the declared 11pt/1.42 metrics; every section is condensed to fragments rather than 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, 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.
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 in the body except the legitimately rendered date and model name.
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.
5.5	The filename of the source ER is stated as “er_filename: [er_filename]”	🟢	Line 4: er_filename: isrib_2026-0904-1639_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: 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: 2026-0904-1911.
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: 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)	🟢	Single word, no version.
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: 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 plus version, no qualifier.
5.12	The filename of the document is stated as “qrs_filename: [filename of this document]”	🟢	Line 9 matches 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.

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: “ISRIB for Health & Longevity - Quick Reference Sheet”.
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: “ISRIB for Health & Longevity”.
6.3	[header_subline_date] is set to [qrs_creation_date reformatted as MM/DD/YYYY]	🟢	Line 421: 09/04/2026 from 2026-0904-1911.
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.	🟢	Header holds only the template’s fixed subline; the ER’s “Also known as” line is correctly omitted.

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 lines 422–428 into mechanism, animal result, human-data gap, harm basis and overall placement.
7.2	[at_a_glance] is no longer than 60 words	🟢	58 words.
7.3	Every fact in [at_a_glance] is supported by a distinct passage in the ER.	🟢	Each of the five clauses maps to a distinct sentence in the ER Conclusion.
7.4	It DOES NOT use acronyms or technical classifications that require specialist knowledge, uses plain-language terms instead	🟢	Uses “cellular brake on protein production”, “dormant egg cells”, “egg-reserve loss”, “heart effects”. The only acronym is the intervention’s own name.
7.5	It DOES NOT cite specific trials (names, years, sample sizes, p-values)	🟢	No trial named; “registered trial” is generic.
7.6	It DOES NOT cite effect sizes, relative risks, or statistical results	🟢	No numbers of any kind.

8. Contraindications

#	Description	Result	Comments
8.1	The section is derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section	🟢	Item 1 from the ER’s “Absolute contraindication” bullet (line 249); items 2–8 from “Populations who should avoid ISRIB” (lines 273–279).
8.2	[stop_items] represent the Contraindications from the ER	🟢	All eight ER contraindications present, none added.
8.3	Individual [stop_items] are formatted as <li></li>	🟢	Eight <li> elements, lines 568–578.
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.	🟢	Bare noun phrases; the ER’s “Absolute contraindication. ISRIB independently impairs clearance…” rationale and the ALS gloss are stripped.
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).	🟢	“within five years”, “Child-Pugh Class B or C”, “above 470 ms in men or 480 ms in women”, “below 45 mL/min/1.73 m²”, “under 18” 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 in the contraindication bullets.
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.	🟢	Section is populated, and the ER does identify such populations.
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 map to ER lines 251–269.
9.2	[caution_items] represent the Key Interactions from the ER, excluding any that are already listed as Contraindications	🟢	Ten of the ER’s eleven interaction bullets carried over; proteasome inhibitors correctly excluded because it appears in the stop gate.
9.3	Individual [caution_items] are formatted as <li></li>	🟢	Ten <li> elements, lines 586–595.
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.	🟢	Caution/Monitor labels, mechanism sentences and Mitigation clauses all stripped.
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).	🟢	Drug lists preserved for platinum agents, TKIs, macrolides, QT-prolonging medicines, analgesics, chaperones, translation promoters and botanicals; trimming is limited to redundant glosses.
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 in the interaction bullets.
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.	🟢	Section is populated, and the ER identifies eleven such bullets.
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 trace to ER Therapeutic Protocol lines 299, 301, 313.
10.2	The three sets of [action] items cover the three most important actionable implementation aspects from the ER Protocol section	🟢	Absence of a human dosing standard, the preclinical reference regimen, and single-versus-split dosing are the three aspects that bear on execution.
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 more than three 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.	🟢	Nine populated variables, lines 449–487; the 0.1–2.5 mg/kg, 2–3 doses value matches ER line 301 exactly.

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	🟢	Onset, persistence and the absence of a human time course — the three components of the ER’s own “Time to effect” bullet (line 353).
11.2	The sets are picked and ordered by the magnitude of the related benefit	🟢	All three attach to the memory endpoint, the ER’s largest benefit, ordered onset → persistence → human-transfer caveat.
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 or more 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.	🟢	“Within days”, “At least 3 weeks”, “Does not exist” with subs reproducing ER line 353.
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 nine entries correspond to the nine #### subheadings under ### Speculative (ER lines 141–175).
12.2	Key variables are [benefits_high], [benefits_medium], [benefits_low], [benefits_speculative]	🟢	All four spans present, lines 541–558.
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.	🟢	Semicolon-separated noun phrases; the ER’s per-item “Basis is animal models only” sentences and PubMed links are stripped.
12.4	Parenthetical content — including effect sizes, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved.	🟢	No parentheses in the benefits list.
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.	🟢	benefits_high, benefits_medium and benefits_low carry style="display: none"; the ER’s “No benefit reaches High/Medium” statements were correctly not carried over.

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 #### subheadings under ### Speculative (ER lines 205–231).
13.2	Key variables are [risks_high], [risks_medium], [risks_low], [risks_speculative]	🟢	All four spans present, lines 607–623.
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.	🟢	Semicolon-separated noun phrases; “Basis is cell culture only”, “Basis is mechanistic reasoning” and all links stripped.
13.4	Parenthetical content — including frequencies, severity grades, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved.	🟢	No parentheses in the risks list; the ER’s “(the cell’s shredder for damaged proteins)” gloss is removed.
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.	🟢	risks_high, risks_medium and risks_low carry style="display: none".

14. Monitoring

#	Description	Result	Comments
14.1	The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section	🟢	Rows reproduce the ER biomarker table at lines 385–394.
14.2	All measurable/quantifiable biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed	🟢	All ten ER table rows present; every name, target and rationale string verified verbatim against the ER.
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 748–751 condense the ER’s baseline / two-week / four-week / three-month / three-to-six-month / AMH-at-six-month schedule from line 381.

15. Qualitative Assessment

#	Description	Result	Comments
15.1	The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section	🟢	Items reproduce the qualitative marker bullets at ER lines 398–402.
15.2	All subjective/qualitative biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed	🟢	All five ER bullets present as qualitative_item_1 through qualitative_item_5.

Issues 04/09/2026 19:27

Pass rate 100.00%. No issues found.

Issues 04/09/2026 19:20

1. 1.1 / 1.3 — At-a-glance overstates evidence basis: [at_a_glance] (line 437) says the harms “are reasoned from animals”, while the ER Conclusion (line 424) says they “are all reasoned from mechanism or animals”; several of the listed harms are mechanistic or cell-culture only, so dropping “mechanism or” strengthens the claim.
2. 1.4 / 4.2 — Wrong ER bullet under split-dosing label: [action_3_sub] (lines 483–486) pairs the verbatim label “Single versus split dosing” with content from the ER’s separate “Best time of day” bullet (ER line 309) instead of that bullet’s own content (ER line 313).

Fixes 04/09/2026 19:20

1. 1.1 / 1.3 — At-a-glance evidence basis restored: Changed “Its harms … are reasoned from animals” to “Harms … are reasoned from mechanism or animals”, matching the ER Conclusion; “Its” was dropped to keep [at_a_glance] within the 60-word limit.
2. 1.4 / 4.2 — Correct ER bullet under split-dosing label: Replaced the “Best time of day” content in [action_3_sub] with the ER’s own “Single versus split dosing” content — “and poor water solubility makes oral absorption erratic”.

Issues 04/09/2026 19:15

1. 4.2 / 4.3 — Invented composite protocol label: [action_3_label] at line 477 reads “Timing and split dosing”, which is not an ER bold label but a merger of the ER’s “Best time of day:” (line 309) and “Single versus split dosing:” (line 313) bullets.

Fixes 04/09/2026 19:15

1. 4.2 / 4.3 — Invented composite protocol label: Changed [action_3_label] from “Timing and split dosing” to the ER’s verbatim bold label “Single versus split dosing”, and reordered [action_3_sub] so the single-versus-split fact leads while the best-time-of-day content is retained.