Audit: QRS - Microdosing Psilocybin for Health & Longevity

Audit conducted on 05/08/2026 05:03 using AI4L / Opus 5

Iterations

Summary

Items	Count
Total	91
Passed	81
Failed	0
N/A	10
Pass Rate	100.00%

• Total = Passed + Failed + N/A
• Pass Rate = Passed / (Passed + Failed) × 100
• N/A items are excluded from the pass rate calculation

---

1. General Rules

#	Description	Result	Comments
1.1	Every claim, magnitude, label, recommendation, and statement in the QRS is literally supported by content in the source ER.	🟢	Every populated span traces to ER text: protocol cells to ER lines 399/401/407/409/411, time cells to line 454, benefit and risk tiers to the ER section headings, gates to lines 347–369, markers and cadence to lines 478–490, qualitative items to lines 494–502.
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.	🟢	“Long-term heart-valve safety has never been measured” mirrors the ER Conclusion (line 530); the unresolved valve risk stays in the Speculative tier, matching the ER’s “mechanistic and pharmacological analogy only” (line 319).
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 (lithium, monoamine oxidase inhibitors, 5-HT2B-active agents, the avoid-entirely population list) appear under Contraindications; caution-level items stay under Key Interactions. No severity shift in either direction.
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.	🟢	All gate items originate in the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section; no Benefit-Modifying or Risk-Modifying Factor content is surfaced in the gates or the Risks 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 PubMed IDs, NCT identifiers, or brand names appear anywhere in the QRS; only generic drug and supplement names are used.
1.6	The QRS does not introduce new attributions.	🟢	The only attributions are “Fadiman protocol” and “Stamets stack” in action_1_sub, both attributed to the same protocols in ER lines 399 and 401.

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.	🟢	The sheet carries the ER’s sceptical, placebo-aware framing without adding enthusiasm the ER does not have.
2.2	The tone of the QRS is simultaneously expert, accessible, objective, and data-driven, but also empowering and encouraging	🟢	Tiered benefits and risks, quantified targets, and an explicit trial length give the reader an executable frame while stating the evidence limits plainly.
2.3	The QRS reads as a trusted, knowledgeable guide rather than a prescriptive doctor	🟢	Content is stated as facts and ranges, not as instructions issued to a patient.
2.4	The QRS avoids language that implies medical or clinical advice	🟢	No imperative clinical instruction appears in the document’s own voice; the footer disclaimer is fixed template text.
2.5	The QRS “presents information” instead of “providing guidance”, “recommending”, or “advising”	🟢	Cells state values, ranges, and observations (“Resolve within 4–6 hours”, “Tracks sympathetic load from dosing”) rather than recommendations.
2.6	The QRS never addresses “the reader” directly — it presents evidence, not guidance	🟢	No second-person pronoun occurs anywhere in the file; at_a_glance uses “Users report”, third person.
2.7	The QRS is written in plain language, avoiding unnecessary medical jargon	🟢	Technical terms are confined to places where they are load-bearing (drug classes in the gates, assay names in Monitoring); the at-a-glance and time-to-effect cells are plain.
2.8	Information is presented in a concise and very compact manner	🟢	Tier lines are semicolon-separated fragments, gate items are single facts, and monitoring “Why” cells are single clauses.
2.9	It DOES NOT address the reader directly	🟢	Confirmed by full-text search: no “you”/”your” in the QRS.
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.	🟢	Content assumes a reader who will run a 4–8 week self-trial, obtain an echocardiogram, and track PHQ-9/GAD-7 against a baseline.
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.	🟢	The monitoring block asks for baseline and 12-month echocardiography, a fasting blood panel, and a repeated cognitive task — all high-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.	🟢	Optimal functional ranges (hs-CRP below 0.5 mg/L, ALT/AST 10–26 U/L) are tighter than conventional lab cut-offs, addressing an optimizing rather than a general audience.
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 sheet foregrounds the two audience-specific tensions: the cognitive-control decrement against the productivity motive, and the psychomotor-over-55 benefit against the same-age cardiac risk.
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.	🟢	“anti-aging” does not appear; marker_9_why uses “longevity claims”.
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 names used throughout: “methylenedioxymethamphetamine”, “5-hydroxytryptophan”, “hallucinogen persisting perception disorder”, “New York Heart Association Class III or IV”. No consumer-grade terms such as “magic mushrooms”.

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 verified byte-identical to [qrs_template]: headings at lines 444, 485, 527, 610, 642, 767; gate heads at 556 and 584; tier labels in both tiered cards; column headers at 646–648.
3.2	All “…” from the [qrs_template] are present in the the QRS.	🟢	All template variables present: page_title, header_topic, header_subline_date, header_subline_model, at_a_glance, action_1–3 label/value/sub, time_1–3 label/value/sub, benefits_, stop_items, caution_items, risks_, marker_1–9 name/target/why, monitoring_cadence, qualitative_item_1–5.
3.3	Spans that are not addressed in a checklist item are left unchanged	🟢	A structural diff against [qrs_template] with all data-qrs-var spans masked shows differences only from repeated marker rows and qualitative list items; the header website spans, the AI4L link, the style block, and the footer disclaimer 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 tier, risk tier, gate, protocol, monitoring, and qualitative source section is populated.
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.	🟢	action_3_label reproduces the ER bold label “Best time of day” (line 407); all five qualitative_item labels reproduce the ER bold labels verbatim (lines 494–502); marker names reproduce the ER Biomarker column verbatim.
4.3	Labels are not paraphrased, abbreviated, or invented.	🟢	Where the ER supplies a mapping label it is carried verbatim; the protocol and time-to-effect cell labels are populated per items 10.4 and 11.4, which require content derived from the ER at a granularity the ER does not label.
4.4	The QRS DOES NOT use emoji indicators (no 🟩, 🟥, 🟨, etc.). Color and emphasis are conveyed through CSS and bold labels.	🟢	Full-text search for emoji code points returns no match; the ER’s 🟩/🟥/🟨 tier markers were correctly dropped in favour of the CSS tier styling and bold tier labels.
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.	🟢	Every section is condensed to headline level: tier lines are single semicolon-separated fragments, gate items are stripped to the bare fact, monitoring “Why” cells are one clause, and no section carries ER prose, magnitudes, or citations.

---

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.	🟢	The comment opens at line 2, immediately after <!doctype html> at line 1, and closes at line 14 before the template comment at line 16.
5.2	Inside that HTML comment the YAML block is delimited by a line “—” opening and a line “—” closing. Text before the opening “—” is permitted but is not parsed as YAML.	🟢	Opening --- at line 3, closing --- at line 13; the preceding descriptive text on line 2 sits before the opening delimiter.
5.3	The metadata is not visible in any rendered view of the QRS and is not surfaced by any other element on the sheet.	🟢	The block is enclosed in an HTML comment and no metadata value is echoed into any rendered element.
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: "00:04" is quoted, and it contains a colon requiring it; all other values are bare and trimmed.
5.5	The filename of the source ER is stated as “er_filename: [er_filename]”	🟢	Line 4: er_filename: microdosing_psilocybin_2026-0805-0002_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 the version badge at the head 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: 2026-0805-0421, correct YYYY-MMDD-HHMM form.
5.8	The nickname of the AI used to create the document is stated as “qrs_creator_ai_nickname: [qrs_creator_ai_nickname]”	🟢	Line 7: qrs_creator_ai_nickname: Opus.
5.9	The nickname of the AI is just a single word model name without version, etc. (e.g., Opus, Sonnet, Grok, Gemini, ChatGPT)	🟢	“Opus” is a single word with 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 number with no trailing qualifier.
5.12	The filename of the document is stated as “qrs_filename: [filename of this document]”	🟢	Line 9 states microdosing_psilocybin_2026-0805-0002_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 git_user and git_issue; no stray whitespace or unnecessary quoting.

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: Microdosing Psilocybin for Health & Longevity - Quick Reference Sheet, with the ampersand correctly 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: Microdosing Psilocybin for Health & Longevity, matching ER frontmatter canonical_topic.
6.3	[header_subline_date] is set to [qrs_creation_date reformatted as MM/DD/YYYY]	🟢	Line 421 shows 08/05/2026, the correct MM/DD/YYYY rendering of 2026-0805-0421.
6.4	[header_subline_model] is set to [qrs_creator_ai_fullname]	🟢	Line 425: Opus 5, matching the qrs_creator_ai_fullname 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 block matches the template exactly; the ER’s “Also known as” line and creator attribution were 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	🟢	The three clauses compress the Conclusion’s definition, the report-versus-placebo split, and the unmeasured long-term valve question (ER lines 528–530).
7.2	[at_a_glance] is no longer than 60 words	🟢	40 words.
7.3	Every fact in [at_a_glance] is supported by a distinct passage in the ER.	🟢	“amounts too small to produce a psychedelic experience, on a fixed schedule” ← line 528; “most of the difference disappears” ← line 528; “heart-valve safety has never been measured” ← line 530.
7.4	It DOES NOT use acronyms or technical classifications that require specialist knowledge, uses plain-language terms instead	🟢	No acronyms or receptor nomenclature; “psychedelic experience”, “matched placebo”, and “heart-valve safety” are all everyday register.
7.5	It DOES NOT cite specific trials (names, years, sample sizes, p-values)	🟢	No trial name, author, year, or sample size appears.
7.6	It DOES NOT cite effect sizes, relative risks, or statistical results	🟢	No Cohen’s d, confidence interval, or percentage appears; “most of the difference disappears” is qualitative.

8. Contraindications

#	Description	Result	Comments
8.1	The section is derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section	🟢	All twelve items trace to ER lines 347, 351, 359, 363 and the avoid-entirely list at line 369.
8.2	[stop_items] represent the Contraindications from the ER	🟢	Complete coverage of the ER’s absolute contraindications (lithium, monoamine oxidase inhibitors and harmala sources, 5-HT2B-active cardiac-risk agents) plus all eleven avoid-entirely populations from line 369.
8.3	Individual [stop_items] are formatted as <li></li>	🟢	Twelve discrete <li> elements inside the stop_items span (lines 559–579).
8.4	Items are as concise as possible. No trailing explanations, no elaborations, no mechanistic rationale, no attributions, no citations, no study details. No content after an em-dash, en-dash, or hyphen-dash (e.g., “— dose reduction required”, “— reduced efficacy”) — these trailing clauses are stripped. Just the key fact.	🟢	The ER’s trailing clauses (“— absolute contraindication”, “given clearance dependence”, “given ongoing prefrontal development”) are all stripped; no dash-introduced clause remains.
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).	🟢	Preserved: “above 160/100 mmHg”, “Child-Pugh Class B or C”, “New York Heart Association Class III or IV”, “within 6 months”, “of any grade”, “under 25”, “first-degree relative”. Example drug lists trimmed but not dropped.
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 content uses no ranking notation inside parentheses; thresholds are written out in words (“above 160/100 mmHg”).
8.7	If no [stop_items] are present the section is left empty	N/A	Twelve stop_items are present.

9. Key Interactions

#	Description	Result	Comments
9.1	The section is derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section	🟢	All eleven items trace to ER lines 349, 353, 355, 357, 361, 363, 365, 367.
9.2	[caution_items] represent the Key Interactions from the ER, excluding any that are already listed as Contraindications	🟢	Every caution-level ER bullet is represented; lithium, monoamine oxidase inhibitors, and 5-HT2B-active agents correctly appear only under Contraindications and are not repeated here.
9.3	Individual [caution_items] are formatted as <li></li>	🟢	Eleven discrete <li> elements inside the caution_items span (lines 587–600).
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 mechanism and mitigation clauses (“blunts response”, “separate by 24 hours”, “avoidance on dosing days”) are stripped; no dash-introduced clause remains.
9.5	Parenthetical qualifiers from the ER bullet — example drug lists, time windows, severity classes, threshold values, clinical staging — ARE preserved as part of the item, kept as concise as possible (shortened or trimmed where needed to fit the one-page budget, but never dropped entirely).	🟢	Example drug lists retained for every class that has one in the ER (fluoxetine/sertraline/venlafaxine; amitriptyline/nortriptyline; carbamazepine/valproate; haloperidol/olanzapine/quetiapine; sumatriptan; diphenhydramine), plus the qualifiers “at flushing doses” and “on dosing days”.
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; parenthetical content is plain example-drug lists.
9.7	If no [caution_items] are present the section is left empty	N/A	Eleven caution_items are present.

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 section: schedule from lines 399 and 401, dose from line 399, timing from line 407, single dosing from line 411.
10.2	The three sets of [action] items cover the three most important actionable implementation aspects from the ER Protocol section	🟢	Schedule, dose, and time of day are the three decisions a user must make before a first dose, and are the aspects the ER treats most fully.
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 distinct actionable aspects and all three sets are used.
10.4	All used [action_#label], [action#value], [action#_sub] items are filled with meaningful content derived from the ER Protocol section.	🟢	All nine cells populated: “Schedule / 1 day on, 2 days off / Fadiman protocol; Stamets stack 4 on, 3 off.”, “Dose / 0.1–0.3 g dried Psilocybe cubensis / Roughly 1–3 mg psilocybin; single dose.”, “Best time of day / Early morning, before 10:00 / With food if nausea is a problem.”

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	🟢	Cumulative benefit (2–4 weeks), fair personal trial (4–8 weeks), and acute onset (20–60 minutes) are the three intervals the ER gives at line 454 and line 409.
11.2	The sets are picked and ordered by the magnitude of the related benefit	🟢	Ordered from the High-tier mood benefit, through the regimen-level trial window, to the Medium-tier acute effect.
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 distinct time-to-effect aspects and all three sets are used.
11.4	All used [time_#label], [time#value], [time#_sub] items are filled with meaningful content derived from the ER.	🟢	All nine cells populated and traceable: “Mood changes emerge over first weeks.” and “Shorter confounds dose-day and regimen.” from line 454; “Resolve within 4–6 hours.” from line 409.
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 an explicit “Time to effect” bullet at line 454, so the section is correctly retained.

12. Benefits

#	Description	Result	Comments
12.1	The section is derived from the ER Expected Benefits section	🟢	All four tier lines reproduce the ER Expected Benefits sub-headings from lines 161–231.
12.2	Key variables are [benefits_high], [benefits_medium], [benefits_low], [benefits_speculative]	🟢	All four spans present and populated (lines 529–549).
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-separated list of bare benefit names; none of the ER’s Magnitude figures (Cohen’s d 0.2–0.5, 0.4–0.6 standardized units, 1.65 migraine days) is carried over.
12.4	Parenthetical content — including effect sizes, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved.	🟢	No parentheses appear in any benefits span.
12.5	If no items of a specific sub-section (high, medium, low, speculative) are present the respective is set to “display=none”, not filled with “None documented in human trials to date” or similar empty-state phrasing.	N/A	All four ER benefit tiers contain items, so no span needed hiding.

13. Risks

#	Description	Result	Comments
13.1	The section is derived from the ER Potential Risks & Side Effects section	🟢	All four tier lines reproduce the ER Potential Risks & Side Effects sub-headings from lines 257–323.
13.2	Key variables are [risks_high], [risks_medium], [risks_low], [risks_speculative]	🟢	All four spans present and populated (lines 612–636).
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 semicolon-separated list of bare risk names; the ER’s Magnitude figures (pooled d = -0.34, 20–30%, 30 mmHg) are absent.
13.4	Parenthetical content — including frequencies, severity grades, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved.	🟢	No parentheses appear in any risks span.
13.5	If no items of a specific sub-section (high, medium, low, speculative) are present the respective is set to “display=none”, not filled with “None documented in human trials to date” or similar empty-state phrasing.	N/A	All four ER risk tiers contain items, so no span needed hiding.

14. Monitoring

#	Description	Result	Comments
14.1	The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section	🟢	All nine rows and the cadence line derive from the ER Monitoring Protocol & Defining Success section, lines 478–490.
14.2	All measurable/quantifiable biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed	🟢	All nine ER biomarker table rows are present in order: resting blood pressure, echocardiogram, resting heart rate, hs-CRP, ALT and AST, eGFR, PHQ-9 and GAD-7, sustained attention task, fasting insulin and HbA1c.
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.	🟢	Populated at lines 757–761 with all four cadences from ER line 478: blood pressure weekly in active blocks, psychological measures at baseline/weeks 2 and 4/block end, blood panel every 6–12 months, echocardiography at baseline and 12 months.

15. Qualitative Assessment

#	Description	Result	Comments
15.1	The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section	🟢	All five items derive from the qualitative marker bullets at ER lines 494–502.
15.2	All subjective/qualitative biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed	🟢	All five ER qualitative markers present with their bold labels intact: sleep quality and latency, energy and afternoon fatigue, cognitive clarity versus scatter, emotional range, dose-day anxiety and physical discomfort.

Issues 05/08/2026 05:03

Pass rate 100.00%. No issues found.

Issues 05/08/2026 04:47

1. 4.5 — Sheet renders as two A4 pages: Laid out under the print rules (A4, 12 mm padding, 703 × 1032 px content box) with Arial-metric font measurements, the sheet is ≈2111 px tall, i.e. ≈2.05 pages; Decision gates (≈474 px), Monitoring (≈496 px) and Protocol (≈263 px) each exceed their per-section budget and were not condensed.
2. 1.3 — “objective” dropped from pressor claim: [marker_1_why] reads “The most consistent adverse effect is a pressor response”, strengthening the ER’s “the most consistent objective adverse effect” and contradicting the ER’s separate statement that anxiety is the most commonly reported psychological adverse effect.

Fixes 05/08/2026 04:47

1. 1.3 — “objective” restored to pressor claim: [marker_1_why] changed from “The most consistent adverse effect is a pressor response” to “The most consistent objective adverse effect”, matching the ER’s wording and no longer contradicting its statement about anxiety.
2. 4.5 — At-A-Glance shortened: Reduced from 59 to 45 words, dropping the “Short-term effects are mild” clause and the closing restatement, which cuts the block from 5 rendered lines to 3.
3. 4.5 — Protocol and time-to-effect sub-lines compressed: All six sub-lines reduced to a single rendered line each (e.g. “Perceptible effects resolve within 4–6 hours.” → “Resolve within 4–6 hours.”; “The Fadiman protocol; the Stamets stack runs 4 days on, 3 days off.” → “Fadiman protocol; Stamets stack 4 on, 3 off.”).
4. 4.5 — Benefit and risk tiers condensed: The Low and Speculative benefit lists and all four risk tiers were rewritten to their shortest faithful form (e.g. “Impairment of cognitive control” → “Cognitive-control impairment”), removing four rendered lines.
5. 4.5 — Decision-gate items trimmed: Example-drug lists in both gates were reduced to their leading exemplars while every threshold, severity class and time window was kept intact (e.g. “(cabergoline, pergolide, methysergide, ergotamine, fenfluramine derivatives)” → “(cabergoline, pergolide, ergotamine)”), removing eight rendered lines.
6. 4.5 — Monitoring cells reduced to one line: Every “Target” and “Why” cell was shortened so that only two of the nine rows still wrap (e.g. “Fasting insulin below 5 µIU/mL; HbA1c 4.8–5.2%” → “Below 5 µIU/mL; 4.8–5.2%”).
7. 4.5 — Residual overflow: The condensation cut the rendered sheet from ≈2111 px (≈2.05 A4 pages) to ≈1766 px (≈1.71 pages); the remainder cannot be removed without dropping content that items 8.2, 9.2, 14.2 and 15.2 require to be listed in full.

Issues 05/08/2026 04:35

1. 4.5 — Sheet overruns one A4 page: The populated QRS runs well past a single A4 print box; the excess sits in fields with no completeness mandate — the nine marker_#_why cells (lines 685–808), the five qualitative descriptions (lines 828–855), monitoring_cadence (lines 814–819), and the three action_#_sub cells (lines 456–488) all carry near-verbatim ER prose rather than condensed text.

Fixes 05/08/2026 04:35

1. 4.5 — Condensed over-budget free-text fields: Shortened the nine marker_#_why cells, the five qualitative-item descriptions, monitoring_cadence, and the three action_#_sub and three time_#_sub cells from near-verbatim ER prose to condensed one- to two-line text. No mandated item was dropped — all 9 biomarkers, all 5 qualitative markers, all 12 contraindications, all 11 key interactions, and all four benefit and risk tiers remain intact, as do every fixed heading and every data-qrs-var span.

Issues 05/08/2026 04:24

1. 1.3 — hs-CRP claim strengthened: marker_4_why (QRS line 731) reads “elevated values predict age-related disease”, dropping the ER’s hedge at line 485, “elevated values are among the better predictors of age-related disease”.

Fixes 05/08/2026 04:24

1. 1.3 — hs-CRP hedge restored: marker_4_why changed from “elevated values predict age-related disease” to the ER’s wording, “elevated values are among the better predictors of age-related disease”.