Audit: QRS - Ivermectin to Treat Cancer

Audit conducted on 02/08/2026 06:48 using AI4L / Opus 4.8

Iterations

Summary

Items Count
Total 91
Passed 84
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 QRS content (protocol, gates, benefits, risks, monitoring, at-a-glance) traces to ER passages.
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 anticancer dose exists”, “Efficacy unproven”, “Not established” mirror ER caution.
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”). 🟢 No strengthening or softening detected; contraindications and risks preserved at ER strength.
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, interactions, benefits, and risks map to the ER’s own categories.
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/NCTs/expert names introduced; drug names (ketoconazole, etc.) all appear in the ER.
1.6 The QRS does not introduce new attributions. 🟢 No new attributions 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. 🟢 Cautious, evidence-weighing tone matches the ER.
2.2 The tone of the QRS is simultaneously expert, accessible, objective, and data-driven, but also empowering and encouraging 🟢 Expert yet accessible; objective framing throughout.
2.3 The QRS reads as a trusted, knowledgeable guide rather than a prescriptive doctor 🟢 Presents evidence, not directives.
2.4 The QRS avoids language that implies medical or clinical advice 🟢 No prescriptive/advisory language.
2.5 The QRS “presents information” instead of “providing guidance”, “recommending”, or “advising” 🟢 Information is presented descriptively.
2.6 The QRS never addresses “the reader” directly — it presents evidence, not guidance 🟢 Third-person throughout; no direct address.
2.7 The QRS is written in plain language, avoiding unnecessary medical jargon 🟢 Plain language; technical terms minimized.
2.8 Information is presented in a concise and very compact manner 🟢 Compact cells, tiered lists, condensed items.
2.9 It DOES NOT address the reader directly 🟢 No second-person 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 suits a proactive, risk-aware reader.
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. 🟢 Protocol/monitoring detail suits an effort-willing audience.
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. 🟢 Not pitched to the general population.
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. 🟢 Risk/benefit weighting reflects the target audience.
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 “anti-aging” usage present.
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. 🟢 Formal terminology used; plain-language substitutions confined to the at-a-glance per 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 fixed headings and labels are unchanged.
3.2 All “” from the [qrs_template] are present in the the QRS. 🟢 Full set of data-qrs-var spans present.
3.3 Spans that are not addressed in a checklist item are left unchanged 🟢 Unused time_2/time_3 spans left empty/hidden.

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 to 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. 🟢 Monitoring markers and tier labels use ER labels; protocol cell labels are the condensed functional labels governed by section 10.
4.3 Labels are not paraphrased, abbreviated, or invented. 🟢 Labels faithfully represent ER content without misrepresentation.
4.4 The QRS DOES NOT use emoji indicators (no 🟩, 🟥, 🟨, etc.). Color and emphasis are conveyed through CSS and bold labels. 🟢 No emoji indicators; tiers use bold text labels and CSS.
4.5 The QRS is designed to render on one A4 page. Any section that has more content in the ER than fits the per-section budget is condensed by the LLM, not extended onto a second page. 🟢 Content condensed to a single-page budget.

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. 🟢 Metadata comment is the first element after the doctype (lines 2-14).
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. 🟢 YAML delimited by — at lines 3 and 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; not rendered.
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. 🟢 Values trimmed; only duration (“00:03”) quoted for its colon.
5.5 The filename of the source ER is stated as “er_filename: [er_filename]” 🟢 er_filename: ivermectin_cancer_2026-0802-0505_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]” 🟢 qrs_prompt_version: 26.7.02.
5.7 Creation date and time of the document is stated as “qrs_creation_date: [YYYY-MMDD-HHMM]” (e.g., 2026-0501-1430) 🟢 qrs_creation_date: 2026-0802-0634.
5.8 The nickname of the AI used to create the document is stated as “qrs_creator_ai_nickname: [qrs_creator_ai_nickname]” 🟢 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) 🟢 Single-word nickname “Opus”.
5.10 The full name of the AI used to create the document is stated as “qrs_creator_ai_fullname: [qrs_creator_ai_fullname]” 🟢 qrs_creator_ai_fullname: Opus 4.8.
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 4.8” = nickname + version, no qualifier.
5.12 The filename of the document is stated as “qrs_filename: [filename of this document]” 🟢 qrs_filename: ivermectin_cancer_2026-0802-0505_Opus_QRS.html.
5.13 All frontmatter values are trimmed: no leading or trailing whitespace, no surrounding quotes unless the value contains a colon, bracket, or leading special character that requires YAML quoting. 🟢 All values clean and consistently quoted.

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., &amp; for &) 🟢 “Ivermectin to Treat Cancer - Quick Reference Sheet”; no entities required.
6.2 [header_topic] is set to the [canonical_topic] of the ER frontmatter, with HTML entities encoded as needed (e.g., &amp; for &) 🟢 “Ivermectin to Treat Cancer” matches canonical_topic.
6.3 [header_subline_date] is set to [qrs_creation_date reformatted as MM/DD/YYYY] 🟢 2026-0802-0634 → 08/02/2026.
6.4 [header_subline_model] is set to [qrs_creator_ai_fullname] 🟢 “Opus 4.8”.
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 carries only the required date/model; no extra content.

7. At-A-Glance Section

# Description Result Comments
7.1 [at_a_glance] is dense, execution-oriented summary of the ER Conclusion section 🟢 Distills the ER Conclusion faithfully.
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 claim traces to the Conclusion.
7.4 It DOES NOT use acronyms or technical classifications that require specialist knowledge, uses plain-language terms instead 🟢 Plain-language terms (“antiparasitic drug”, “immune-therapy”).
7.5 It DOES NOT cite specific trials (names, years, sample sizes, p-values) 🟢 No trials cited.
7.6 It DOES NOT cite effect sizes, relative risks, or statistical results 🟢 No statistics cited.

8. Contraindications

# Description Result Comments
8.1 The section is derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section 🟢 Contraindications drawn from ER line 265.
8.2 [stop_items] represent the Contraindications from the ER 🟢 All six ER contraindications represented.
8.3 Individual [stop_items] are formatted as <li></li> 🟢 Each contraindication is an <li>.
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. 🟢 Trailing explanatory clauses (e.g., Loa loa encephalopathy note) 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). 🟢 “Child-Pugh Class B or C” and CNS examples preserved.
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 contraindications use no ranking notation.
8.7 If no [stop_items] are present the section is left empty N/A Contraindications are present.

9. Key Interactions

# Description Result Comments
9.1 The section is derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section 🟢 Interactions drawn from ER lines 251-261.
9.2 [caution_items] represent the Key Interactions from the ER, excluding any that are already listed as Contraindications 🟢 CYP3A4/P-gp inhibitors, CNS depressants, warfarin, grapefruit/SJW/high-fat represented.
9.3 Individual [caution_items] are formatted as <li></li> 🟢 Each interaction is an <li>.
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. 🟢 Mechanistic/mitigation clauses 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). 🟢 Example drug lists preserved; GABA definition 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 interactions use no ranking notation.
9.7 If no [caution_items] are present the section is left empty N/A Key Interactions are present.

10. Protocol

# Description Result Comments
10.1 The section is derived from the ER Protocol section 🟢 Dose, food, frequency drawn from ER Therapeutic Protocol.
10.2 The three sets of [action] items cover the three most important actionable implementation aspects from the ER Protocol section 🟢 Dose, With Food, Frequency are the key actionable aspects.
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 Three actionable aspects are present.
10.4 All used [action_#label], [action#value], [action#_sub] items are filled with meaningful content derived from the ER Protocol section. 🟢 All three cells filled with ER-derived content.

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 offers a single time-to-effect aspect (time to benefit); it is represented.
11.2 The sets are picked and ordered by the magnitude of the related benefit 🟢 Only one aspect exists; ordering is trivially satisfied.
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. 🟢 time_2/time_3 left empty and hidden (display:none).
11.4 All used [time_#label], [time#value], [time#_sub] items are filled with meaningful content derived from the ER. 🟢 time_1 filled with ER-derived content.
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 (six-month cohort assessment).

12. Benefits

# Description Result Comments
12.1 The section is derived from the ER Expected Benefits section 🟢 Benefits drawn from ER Expected Benefits.
12.2 Key variables are [benefits_high], [benefits_medium], [benefits_low], [benefits_speculative] 🟢 All four tier variables present.
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. 🟢 Concise tier facts only.
12.4 Parenthetical content — including effect sizes, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved. 🟢 No parenthetical detail carried over.
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/medium hidden (ER has only Low + Speculative benefits).

13. Risks

# Description Result Comments
13.1 The section is derived from the ER Potential Risks & Side Effects section 🟢 Risks drawn from ER Potential Risks & Side Effects.
13.2 Key variables are [risks_high], [risks_medium], [risks_low], [risks_speculative] 🟢 All four tier variables present.
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. 🟢 Concise tier facts only.
13.4 Parenthetical content — including frequencies, severity grades, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved. 🟢 No parenthetical detail carried over.
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. 🟢 All four tiers have ER content and are shown.

14. Monitoring

# Description Result Comments
14.1 The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section 🟢 Markers drawn from ER Monitoring Protocol table.
14.2 All measurable/quantifiable biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed 🟢 ALT, AST, total bilirubin, CBC, creatinine all listed.
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. 🟢 Cadence matches ER: every 4 weeks initially, then every 3–6 months.

15. Qualitative Assessment

# Description Result Comments
15.1 The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section 🟢 Qualitative items drawn from ER Monitoring qualitative markers.
15.2 All subjective/qualitative biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed 🟢 Neurological status, vision, energy/appetite, well-being/imaging all listed.

Issues 02/08/2026 06:48

Pass rate 100.00%. No issues found.

Issues 02/08/2026 06:42

  1. 2.6 / 2.9 — Protocol cell addresses reader: The protocol food cell uses imperative mood that addresses the reader directly: action_2_value “Take with food” (line 458) and action_2_sub “keep fat intake consistent” (line 461); the QRS voice must present information, not instruct the reader.

Fixes 02/08/2026 06:42

  1. 2.6 / 2.9 — Protocol food cell addressed reader: Rephrased the imperative food cell into descriptive form — action_2_value “Take with food” → “With a fatty meal”, and action_2_sub tail “keep fat intake consistent” → “consistent fat intake avoids unpredictable levels”.