Audit: QRS - Microdosing LSD Analogues for Health & Longevity

Audit conducted on 05/08/2026 08:31 using AI4L / Opus 5

Iterations

Summary

Items	Count
Total	91
Passed	82
Failed	0
N/A	9
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 values (5–20 µg, days 1/4/7, before 10:00), time-to-effect values (24 min, 1.1 h, 5.1 h, 4–6 weeks), tier contents, gate items, marker targets and cadence trace to ER text.
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.	🟢	“conversion unmeasured”, “evening dosing untested”, “evidence conflicted”, “no cumulative effect detected”, “Main theoretical long-term risk”, “Predicted haematological signal” mirror ER hedging.
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 (MAOIs, lithium, ergot/5-HT2B chronic use) remain in the stop gate; caution/monitor items remain in the interactions 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.	🟢	No content from Benefit-Modifying Factors or Risk-Modifying Factors appears in the gates or the risk card.
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 IDs, author names or brand names anywhere in the QRS.
1.6	The QRS does not introduce new attributions.	🟢	Only “The Fadiman schedule”, which is an ER bullet label.

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, hedged register matches the ER throughout.
2.2	The tone of the QRS is simultaneously expert, accessible, objective, and data-driven, but also empowering and encouraging	🟢	Quantified, neutral framing; the qualitative and monitoring cards give the reader actionable self-assessment structure.
2.3	The QRS reads as a trusted, knowledgeable guide rather than a prescriptive doctor	🟢	Values are presented as observed trial parameters, not instructions.
2.4	The QRS avoids language that implies medical or clinical advice	🟢	No imperatives; monitoring targets are stated as reference values.
2.5	The QRS “presents information” instead of “providing guidance”, “recommending”, or “advising”	🟢	No occurrences of recommend/advise/should.
2.6	The QRS never addresses “the reader” directly — it presents evidence, not guidance	🟢	No second-person pronouns present.
2.7	The QRS is written in plain language, avoiding unnecessary medical jargon	🟢	Technical terms retained only where they are decision-relevant (Child-Pugh B/C, 5-HT2B, QTc).
2.8	Information is presented in a concise and very compact manner	🟢	Tier lines are semicolon-separated fragments; gate items are noun phrases.
2.9	It DOES NOT address the reader directly	🟢	Confirmed by full-text scan for you/your.
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.	🟢	Echocardiographic surveillance, self-blinding and volumetric-accuracy framing address exactly this 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.	🟢	Daily BP series, wearable tracking and periodic echocardiography 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.	🟢	Content assumes a demanding monitoring regimen.
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.	🟢	Long-horizon valvular risk and cognitive-control decrement are foregrounded, which is the longevity-specific weighting.
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” used in the title; no “anti-aging” anywhere.
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.	🟢	“myocardial infarction”, “transient ischaemic attack”, “hepatic impairment”, “regurgitation” used rather than lay equivalents.

3. Template Integrity

#	Description	Result	Comments
3.1	The following labels and headings on the QRS are fixed and not modified: Card and section headings: “Protocol”, “Time to effect”, “Benefits”, “Risk & Side Effects”, “Monitoring”, “Qualitative Assessment”; Gate headings: “Contraindications”, “Key Interactions”; Tier labels: “High”, “Medium”, “Low”, “Speculative”; Table column headers in Monitoring: “Marker”, “Target”, “Why”	🟢	All headings verbatim (lines 442, 485, 533, 545, 551, 562, 573, 694); tier labels and table headers unmodified.
3.2	All “…” from the [qrs_template] are present in the the QRS.	🟢	67 data-qrs-var spans present, covering the full variable set (header, at_a_glance, action_1–3, time_1–3, benefits/risks tiers, gates, marker_1–9, cadence, qualitative_item_1–6).
3.3	Spans that are not addressed in a checklist item are left unchanged	🟢	No span outside the checklist scope was altered; template comments, CSS and the footer disclaimer are intact.

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 is empty; the ER supplies content for every section the QRS draws on.
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.	🟢	“Dose range”, “The Fadiman schedule (one day on, two days off)”, “Best time of day” and all six qualitative labels reproduce ER bold labels verbatim.
4.3	Labels are not paraphrased, abbreviated, or invented.	🟢	Protocol and qualitative labels are ER-verbatim; monitoring marker names retain the ER’s identifying terms.
4.4	The QRS DOES NOT use emoji indicators (no 🟩, 🟥, 🟨, etc.). Color and emphasis are conveyed through CSS and bold labels.	🟢	Zero emoji in the file; tiers rendered via <strong> labels and 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.	🟢	Tier lines, gate items, marker targets and cadence are all condensed to fragments; estimated render fits within the A4 print block.

---

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 --- line 3, closing --- 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 into the body other than legitimately templated header variables.
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: "00:05" 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: microdosing_lsd_analogues_2026-0805-0424_Opus_ER.md.
5.6	Version of the QRS.md file used to create the document is stated as “qrs_prompt_version: [Version of QRS.md]”	🟢	Line 5: qrs_prompt_version: 26.7.02, matching 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: 2026-0805-0729.
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.
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 plus version, no qualifier.
5.12	The filename of the document is stated as “qrs_filename: [filename of this document]”	🟢	Line 9 matches the actual filename.
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.	🟢	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 &)	🟢	“Microdosing LSD Analogues for Health & Longevity - Quick Reference Sheet” (line 22).
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, entity-encoded ampersand.
6.3	[header_subline_date] is set to [qrs_creation_date reformatted as MM/DD/YYYY]	🟢	2026-0805-0729 → “08/05/2026” (line 421).
6.4	[header_subline_model] is set to [qrs_creator_ai_fullname]	🟢	“Opus 5” (line 425).
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 contains only the title and the templated subline; the ER’s “Also known as” list is not carried over.

7. At-A-Glance Section

#	Description	Result	Comments
7.1	[at_a_glance] is dense, execution-oriented summary of the ER Conclusion section	🟢	Condenses all three Conclusion paragraphs: prodrug conversion, on-dose-only effects, cognitive-control decrement, cost and supply status.
7.2	[at_a_glance] is no longer than 60 words	🟢	42 words.
7.3	Every fact in [at_a_glance] is supported by a distinct passage in the ER.	🟢	Each clause maps to a distinct Conclusion sentence (lines 562, 564, 566 of the ER).
7.4	It DOES NOT use acronyms or technical classifications that require specialist knowledge, uses plain-language terms instead	🟢	Only “LSD”, which is the intervention’s common name and universally recognised; “mental control” replaces “cognitive control”.
7.5	It DOES NOT cite specific trials (names, years, sample sizes, p-values)	🟢	Refers only to “controlled work” generically.
7.6	It DOES NOT cite effect sizes, relative risks, or statistical results	🟢	No numbers, no Cohen’s d, no confidence intervals.

8. Contraindications

#	Description	Result	Comments
8.1	The section is derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section	🟢	All ten items trace to the absolute-contraindication bullets and the “Populations who should avoid this intervention” bullet.
8.2	[stop_items] represent the Contraindications from the ER	🟢	MAOIs/linezolid, lithium, ergot/5-HT2B chronic use, bipolar/psychosis history, valvular disease/pulmonary hypertension, uncontrolled hypertension/cardiac windows, seizure disorder, Child-Pugh B/C, pregnancy/conception/breastfeeding, safety-critical occupations — complete.
8.3	Individual [stop_items] are formatted as <li></li>	🟢	Ten discrete <li> elements inside the span (line 547).
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.	🟢	No dashes, severity statements, or mitigation clauses carried over; the ER’s “Mitigation:” text is fully 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).	🟢	“(140/90 mmHg or above)”, “under 90 days”, “under 12 months”, “Child-Pugh Class B or C”, “any grade, including trivial regurgitation”, “first-degree family history” 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 inside parentheses in its contraindication bullets.
8.7	If no [stop_items] are present the section is left empty	N/A	Ten stop items are present.

9. Key Interactions

#	Description	Result	Comments
9.1	The section is derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section	🟢	All nine items map one-to-one onto the ER’s caution/monitor bullets.
9.2	[caution_items] represent the Key Interactions from the ER, excluding any that are already listed as Contraindications	🟢	MAOIs, lithium and ergot derivatives correctly appear only in the stop gate, not here.
9.3	Individual [caution_items] are formatted as <li></li>	🟢	Nine discrete <li> elements (line 553).
9.4	Items are as concise as possible. No trailing explanations, no elaborations, no mechanistic rationale, no attributions, no citations, no study details. No content after an em-dash, en-dash, or hyphen-dash (e.g., “— dose reduction required”, “— reduced efficacy”) — these trailing clauses are stripped. Just the key fact.	🟢	Severity labels (“caution”, “monitor”) and all mitigation sentences removed; no dashes present.
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 drugs retained and trimmed: (fluoxetine, venlafaxine), (amitriptyline), (paroxetine, bupropion), (amlodipine, metoprolol), (dextromethorphan), (5-HTP, L-Tryptophan), (caffeine, yohimbine), (grapefruit), (full-dose sessions, alcohol).
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 inside parentheses in its interaction bullets.
9.7	If no [caution_items] are present the section is left empty	N/A	Nine caution items are present.

10. Protocol

#	Description	Result	Comments
10.1	The section is derived from the ER Protocol section	🟢	All three cells come from the ER Therapeutic Protocol bullets “Dose range”, “The Fadiman schedule” and “Best time of day”.
10.2	The three sets of [action] items cover the three most important actionable implementation aspects from the ER Protocol section	🟢	Dose, schedule and timing are the three decisions a user must make first; alternative schedules are correctly omitted as lower-priority.
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 well over 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 fields, each traceable: “5–20 µg of LSD base”, “Days 1, 4, 7”, “Morning, before 10:00”, plus the three qualifying sublines.

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	🟢	Sleep effect (following night), acute subjective onset (1.1 h), and the 4–6 week assessment window — the three timings in the ER’s Practical Considerations “Time to effect” bullet.
11.2	The sets are picked and ordered by the magnitude of the related benefit	🟢	Sleep duration first (the ER’s “single most robust objective finding”), then the conflicted mood signal, then the overall assessment period.
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	Three distinct time-to-effect aspects are present in the ER; 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.	🟢	“about 24 minutes”, “about 1.1 hours”, “about 5.1 hours”, “ten to fourteen dosing days”, “no cumulative effect” all match ER wording.
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 explicit time-to-effect information.

12. Benefits

#	Description	Result	Comments
12.1	The section is derived from the ER Expected Benefits section	🟢	All eleven fragments correspond to the eleven ER benefit headings.
12.2	Key variables are [benefits_high], [benefits_medium], [benefits_low], [benefits_speculative]	🟢	All four spans present (lines 535–538).
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; no magnitudes, no “⚠️ Conflicted” markers, no sponsor attributions.
12.4	Parenthetical content — including effect sizes, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved.	🟢	No parentheses in any benefit tier.
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.	🟢	The ER has no High benefit tier; benefits_high is empty with style="display: none" (line 535).

13. Risks

#	Description	Result	Comments
13.1	The section is derived from the ER Potential Risks & Side Effects section	🟢	All fourteen fragments correspond to the fourteen ER risk headings.
13.2	Key variables are [risks_high], [risks_medium], [risks_low], [risks_speculative]	🟢	All four spans present (lines 564–567).
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.	🟢	No Cohen’s d, no 10% withdrawal figure, no sponsor attribution, no mechanism text.
13.4	Parenthetical content — including frequencies, severity grades, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved.	🟢	No parentheses in any risk tier.
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 risk tiers carry items in the ER, so no sub-section is empty.

14. Monitoring

#	Description	Result	Comments
14.1	The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section	🟢	Marker names, targets and rationales all trace to the ER Monitoring Protocol & Defining Success biomarker table.
14.2	All measurable/quantifiable biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed	🟢	All nine ER table rows present: echocardiogram, blood pressure, resting heart rate, hs-CRP, ALT/AST, complete blood count, ECG/QTc, fasting glucose & HbA1c, thyroid panel.
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.	🟢	Line 687 reproduces all three ER cadences (daily→weekly, blood work 3 months then 6–12 months, echo 12 months then 12–24 months).

15. Qualitative Assessment

#	Description	Result	Comments
15.1	The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section	🟢	All six items come from the ER’s qualitative-marker bullet list.
15.2	All subjective/qualitative biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed	🟢	Sleep duration and quality; mood, energy and irritability; anxiety; cognitive control in daily work; sense of connectedness and engagement; success definition — all six present with ER-verbatim labels.

Issues 05/08/2026 08:31

Pass rate 100.00%. No issues found.

Issues 05/08/2026 08:22

1. 2.7 — Unexplained “TIA” abbreviation: The contraindication item at line 547 reads “stroke or TIA under 12 months”; the ER never abbreviates the term, writing “transient ischaemic attack” with a plain-language gloss at line 391.

Fixes 05/08/2026 08:22

1. 2.7 — Unexplained “TIA” abbreviation: Expanded the abbreviation in the contraindications gate, changing “stroke or TIA under 12 months” to “stroke or transient ischaemic attack under 12 months” to match the ER’s own wording.

Issues 05/08/2026 08:19

1. 1.3 — Cumulative-effect hedge dropped: [time_3_sub] (line 524) asserts “no cumulative effect”, strengthening the ER’s hedged statement at line 482 that “Any cumulative effect, if it exists, is not detectable in trials”.

Fixes 05/08/2026 08:19

1. 1.3 — Cumulative-effect hedge restored: Changed [time_3_sub] from “no cumulative effect” to “no cumulative effect detected”, matching the ER’s hedged wording that any cumulative effect is not detectable in trials.

Issues 05/08/2026 08:12

1. 13.3 — Mechanism retained in speculative risk: [risks_speculative] (line 567) reads “Valvular heart disease from chronic 5-HT2B activation”, carrying the mechanistic explanation that 13.3 explicitly bars; the key fact alone is “Valvular heart disease”.

Fixes 05/08/2026 08:12

1. 13.3 — Mechanism stripped from speculative risk: Changed the first [risks_speculative] item from “Valvular heart disease from chronic 5-HT2B activation” to “Valvular heart disease”, removing the mechanistic clause.

Issues 05/08/2026 07:57

1. 4.5 — Sheet overflows one A4 page: The rendered content measures roughly 2,400 px against the ~1,032 px usable height of the template’s A4 print geometry — about 2.3 pages — driven mainly by the nine full-sentence Monitoring rows, the two nineteen-item decision gates, the six Qualitative Assessment descriptions and the multi-sentence Protocol sub-lines.

Fixes 05/08/2026 07:57

1. 4.5 — Monitoring table condensed: Every “Marker”, “Target” and “Why” cell was cut to a single rendered line (e.g. “Detects the fibrotic valve change that is the main theoretical long-term risk” → “Main theoretical long-term risk”; “Echocardiogram (valve morphology, regurgitation grade)” → “Echocardiogram”), taking the table from roughly 28 to 9 text lines. All nine ER biomarkers and the cadence line are retained.
2. 4.5 — Decision gates tightened: Contraindication and Key Interaction items were shortened and their example-drug parentheses trimmed to the leading one or two names (e.g. “Selective serotonin and serotonin-noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (fluoxetine, sertraline, venlafaxine)” → “Serotonin and serotonin-noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (fluoxetine, venlafaxine)”), cutting the taller column from 21 to 14 lines while keeping all ten stop items, all nine caution items and every threshold, time window and severity class.
3. 4.5 — Protocol and Time to Effect sub-lines shortened: The six sub-lines were reduced to one clause each (e.g. “Every controlled trial dosed in the morning; evening dosing is entirely untested. The prodrug step adds an unquantified delay.” → “Every controlled trial dosed in the morning; evening dosing untested.”), removing the second sentence from each cell.
4. 4.5 — Benefit and Risk tiers trimmed: Tier lines were reduced to bare sub-heading phrases (e.g. “Acute increase in circulating neuroplasticity signalling; reduction in depressive symptoms; acute reduction in pain sensitivity” → “Acute neuroplasticity signalling; reduced depressive symptoms; reduced pain sensitivity”), taking the two cards from 15 to 10 lines with no benefit or risk dropped.
5. 4.5 — Qualitative Assessment and At-A-Glance compressed: The six qualitative descriptions were cut to single lines behind their verbatim ER bold labels, and At-A-Glance was reduced from 57 to 42 words. Overall the sheet went from 869 to 593 visible words and from roughly 2,400 px to roughly 1,650 px of laid-out height.

Issues 05/08/2026 07:50

1. 1.2 / 1.3 — “Theoretical” qualifier dropped: The ER consistently describes the valve concern as “the main theoretical long-term risk” (Monitoring table, echocardiogram row) and grades it Speculative, but [marker_1_why] in the QRS states “the main long-term risk”, removing the ER’s cautious qualifier and strengthening the claim.

Fixes 05/08/2026 07:50

1. 1.2 / 1.3 — “Theoretical” qualifier restored: Changed [marker_1_why] from “Detects the fibrotic valve change that is the main long-term risk” to “…the main theoretical long-term risk”, matching the ER’s cautious phrasing.

Issues 05/08/2026 07:41

1. 4.5 — Content exceeds one A4 page: Multiple sections carry ER-length prose instead of the per-section budget — two-sentence protocol subs (lines 455–459, 484–487), full five-drug parentheticals in both decision gates (lines 575–632), three-line “Why” cells in Monitoring (e.g. lines 696–699, 803–806) and two-line Qualitative entries (lines 842–876) — pushing estimated rendered height to roughly twice the A4 content box.
2. 2.15 — Colloquial word in At-a-Glance: [at_a_glance] (line 437) uses the consumer-grade “Cheap”, where the ER’s own voice uses the formal “an inexpensive practice” (ER Conclusion).

Fixes 05/08/2026 07:41

1. 2.15 — Colloquial word in At-a-Glance: Replaced “Cheap” with “Inexpensive” in [at_a_glance], matching the ER Conclusion’s formal register; the summary remains at 57 words.
2. 4.5 — Protocol and Time-to-Effect subs condensed: Tightened all six [action_#sub] and [time#_sub] cells to single-clause statements, e.g. [action_1_sub] from “10 µg is the threshold for any perceptible psychotropic effect; 20 µg produces both good and bad drug effects. On analogue blotter the stated figure is nominal, since conversion efficiency in humans is unmeasured.” to “10 µg is the perceptual threshold; 20 µg produces good and bad effects. Conversion efficiency in humans is unmeasured, so a stated figure is nominal.”
3. 4.5 — Benefits and Risks lines shortened: Trimmed redundant modifiers in [benefits_medium], [benefits_speculative], [risks_medium] and [risks_speculative] (e.g. “acute mood elevation and subjective well-being on dosing days” to “acute mood elevation and well-being on dosing days”) without dropping any ER benefit or risk heading.
4. 4.5 — Contraindications gate condensed: Trimmed example drug lists and wording across the ten [stop_items] (e.g. “persistently at or above 140/90 mmHg” to “140/90 mmHg or above”, “Significant hepatic impairment at Child-Pugh Class B or C” to “Hepatic impairment, Child-Pugh Class B or C”) while retaining all ten items and every threshold, time window and severity qualifier.
5. 4.5 — Key Interactions gate condensed: Shortened the nine [caution_items] by reducing each parenthetical to three representative drugs or supplements and dropping the “high-dose”/”repetitive” modifiers, keeping all nine ER interaction bullets and their named examples.
6. 4.5 — Monitoring table cells tightened: Shortened target and “Why” text on seven of the nine biomarker rows (e.g. marker_2_why from “Quantifies the individual vascular response rather than assuming the trial average” to “Quantifies the individual vascular response”), cutting roughly a third of the table’s rendered lines with all nine markers retained.
7. 4.5 — Qualitative Assessment entries tightened: Condensed four of the six [qualitative_item_#] entries to a single line each (e.g. item 4 from “Errors of inattention, difficulty holding to an intention, and susceptibility to distraction on dosing days” to “Errors of inattention and distraction on dosing days”), keeping all six ER qualitative markers and their verbatim bold labels.