evipedia.ai ← Back to Review

Audit: QRS - Milk Thistle for Health & Longevity

Audit conducted on 07/07/2026 00:58 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 protocol, benefit, risk, monitoring, and gate content 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. 🟢 Speculative tier and “Theoretical estrogenic effects” preserve ER’s cautious phrasing.
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”). 🟢 Gate items mirror ER’s own grouping “Populations who should avoid or use caution” (ER line 317).
1.4 The QRS does not relabel an ER fact under a different decision category. 🟢 Contraindications and Key Interactions both drawn from 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. 🟢 QRS contains no citations, PMIDs, NCTs, or brand names.
1.6 The QRS does not introduce new attributions. 🟢 No 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. 🟢 Objective, evidence-first tone matches the ER.
2.2 The tone of the QRS is simultaneously expert, accessible, objective, and data-driven, but also empowering and encouraging 🟢 Data-driven and accessible throughout.
2.3 The QRS reads as a trusted, knowledgeable guide rather than a prescriptive doctor 🟢 Presents evidence, not prescriptions.
2.4 The QRS avoids language that implies medical or clinical advice 🟢 No advice-implying language in the variable content.
2.5 The QRS “presents information” instead of “providing guidance”, “recommending”, or “advising” 🟢 Content is presented as facts and ranges.
2.6 The QRS never addresses “the reader” directly — it presents evidence, not guidance 🟢 No second-person address in variable content.
2.7 The QRS is written in plain language, avoiding unnecessary medical jargon 🟢 Biomarker/enzyme terms are used only where necessary (monitoring/interactions).
2.8 Information is presented in a concise and very compact manner 🟢 Cells and lists are terse.
2.9 It DOES NOT address the reader directly 🟢 No “you/your” in variable content.
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 targets proactive optimizers.
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 and monitoring assume a willing, engaged 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. 🟢 Not framed for 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. 🟢 Notes benefits appear mainly in those with elevated markers.
2.14 The document’s own voice frames usage in longevity terms, not “anti-aging”. Proper names that contain “anti-aging” 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. Direct quotes from sources are exempt. 🟢 Formal terminology used outside the plain-language At-A-Glance (governed by 7.4).

3. Template Integrity

# Description Result Comments
3.1 The following labels and headings on the QRS are fixed and not modified: card/section headings, gate headings, tier labels, Monitoring table column headers. 🟢 “Protocol”, “Time to effect”, “Benefits”, “Risk & Side Effects”, “Monitoring”, “Qualitative Assessment”, “Contraindications”, “Key Interactions”, tiers, and “Marker/Target/Why” all intact.
3.2 All “…” from the [qrs_template] are present in the QRS. 🟢 Full variable set present (header, at_a_glance, actions, times, benefits, risks, gates, markers, cadence, qualitative).
3.3 Spans that are not addressed in a checklist item are left unchanged 🟢 Non-addressed spans 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. 🟢 Empty High tiers are handled via display:none per 12.5/13.5; no other empty section requires empty-state phrasing.
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 rows use ER biomarker names verbatim; Protocol labels are synthesized per section 10’s specific rules.
4.3 Labels are not paraphrased, abbreviated, or invented. 🟢 Labels faithfully represent ER content.
4.4 The QRS DOES NOT use emoji indicators (no 🟩, 🟥, 🟨, etc.). 🟢 No emoji in QRS content; color via CSS only.
4.5 The QRS is designed to render on one A4 page. 🟢 Content is condensed to fit one page.

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. 🟢 Comment at lines 2–14, first after doctype.
5.2 Inside that HTML comment the YAML block is delimited by a line “—” opening and a line “—” closing. 🟢 Delimited at lines 3 and 13.
5.3 The metadata is not visible in any rendered view of the QRS. 🟢 Inside an HTML comment; not rendered.
5.4 All frontmatter values are trimmed: no leading/trailing whitespace, no surrounding quotes unless required. 🟢 Only duration (colon) is quoted, correctly.
5.5 The filename of the source ER is stated as “er_filename: [er_filename]”. 🟢 er_filename: milk_thistle_2026-0707-0002_Opus_ER.md.
5.6 Version of the QRS.md file used to create the document is stated as “qrs_prompt_version: [Version]”. 🟢 qrs_prompt_version: 26.7.02.
5.7 Creation date and time is stated as “qrs_creation_date: [YYYY-MMDD-HHMM]”. 🟢 qrs_creation_date: 2026-0707-0048.
5.8 The nickname of the AI is stated as “qrs_creator_ai_nickname”. 🟢 qrs_creator_ai_nickname: Opus.
5.9 The nickname is a single word model name without version. 🟢 “Opus”.
5.10 The full name of the AI is stated as “qrs_creator_ai_fullname”. 🟢 qrs_creator_ai_fullname: Opus 4.8.
5.11 The full name consists of nickname and version number with no additional qualifier. 🟢 “Opus 4.8”.
5.12 The filename of the document is stated as “qrs_filename”. 🟢 qrs_filename: milk_thistle_2026-0707-0002_Opus_QRS.html.
5.13 All frontmatter values are trimmed. 🟢 Values clean and consistent.

6. Page Title & Header

# Description Result Comments
6.1 [page_title] is the [canonical_topic] followed by “ - Quick Reference Sheet”, HTML-entity-encoded as needed. 🟢 “Milk Thistle for Health & Longevity - Quick Reference Sheet”.
6.2 [header_topic] is set to the [canonical_topic], HTML entities encoded as needed. 🟢 “Milk Thistle for Health & Longevity”.
6.3 [header_subline_date] is set to [qrs_creation_date reformatted as MM/DD/YYYY]. 🟢 2026-0707 → 07/07/2026.
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 line, source-AI attribution, audit date, or variant marker). 🟢 Header contains only the standard subline.

7. At-A-Glance Section

# Description Result Comments
7.1 [at_a_glance] is a dense, execution-oriented summary of the ER Conclusion section. 🟢 Distills the ER Conclusion (lines 452–456).
7.2 [at_a_glance] is no longer than 60 words. 🟢 56 words.
7.3 Every fact in [at_a_glance] is supported by a distinct passage in the ER. 🟢 Each claim maps to a Conclusion passage.
7.4 It DOES NOT use acronyms or technical classifications requiring specialist knowledge; uses plain-language terms instead. 🟢 “liver enzymes”, “blood sugar”, “blood fats” — all plain language.
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 effect sizes.

8. Contraindications

# Description Result Comments
8.1 The section is derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section. 🟢 Drawn from ER line 317 population list.
8.2 [stop_items] represent the Contraindications from the ER. 🟢 Asteraceae allergy, decompensated liver disease (Child-Pugh C), pregnancy/breastfeeding, hormone-sensitive conditions.
8.3 Individual [stop_items] are formatted as <li></li>. 🟢 Each is an <li>.
8.4 Items are as concise as possible; no trailing explanations after em/en/hyphen-dash. 🟢 No trailing clauses; only permitted parentheticals.
8.5 Parenthetical qualifiers (time windows, severity classes, thresholds, staging) ARE preserved, kept concise. 🟢 Asteraceae examples and Child-Pugh Class C preserved.
8.6 When the ER uses ranking notation inside parens (e.g., “>”), normalize to a plain comma-separated list. N/A ER contraindications use no ranking notation.
8.7 If no [stop_items] are present the section is left empty. N/A Stop items are present.

9. Key Interactions

# Description Result Comments
9.1 The section is derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section. 🟢 Drawn from ER lines 305–314.
9.2 [caution_items] represent the Key Interactions from the ER, excluding any already listed as Contraindications. 🟢 CYP2C9/CYP3A4 drugs, antidiabetics, glucuronidated drugs, additive glucose-lowering supplements.
9.3 Individual [caution_items] are formatted as <li></li>. 🟢 Each is an <li>.
9.4 Items are as concise as possible; no trailing explanations after em/en/hyphen-dash. 🟢 No trailing clauses; only permitted parentheticals.
9.5 Parenthetical qualifiers (example drug lists, thresholds, staging) ARE preserved, kept concise. 🟢 Named example drugs preserved.
9.6 When the ER uses ranking notation inside parens (e.g., “>”), normalize to a plain comma-separated list. N/A No ranking notation in ER interactions.
9.7 If no [caution_items] are present the section is left empty. N/A Caution items are present.

10. Protocol

# Description Result Comments
10.1 The section is derived from the ER Protocol section. 🟢 Drawn from ER lines 337–347.
10.2 The three [action] sets cover the three most important actionable implementation aspects from the ER Protocol. 🟢 Dose, formulation, timing.
10.3 If less than three actionable aspects are mentioned, unused sets are left empty and invisible. N/A Three actionable aspects are present.
10.4 All used [action_#_label/value/sub] items are filled with meaningful content from the ER Protocol. 🟢 All three cells fully and faithfully populated.

11. Time to Effect

# Description Result Comments
11.1 The three [time] sets cover the three most important time-to-effect aspects from the ER. 🟢 Liver enzymes, blood sugar, lipids & inflammation.
11.2 The sets are picked and ordered by the magnitude of the related benefit. 🟢 Ordered Medium (liver, glycemic) then Low (lipids/inflammation).
11.3 If less than three time-to-effect aspects are mentioned, unused sets are left empty and invisible. N/A Three aspects are present.
11.4 All used [time_#_label/value/sub] items are filled with meaningful content from the ER. 🟢 Supported by ER lines 388, 412.
11.5 If the ER provides no time-to-effect information, the section is removed from the Protocol Panel. N/A ER provides time-to-effect information.

12. Benefits

# Description Result Comments
12.1 The section is derived from the ER Expected Benefits section. 🟢 Maps to ER lines 159–223.
12.2 Key variables are [benefits_high], [benefits_medium], [benefits_low], [benefits_speculative]. 🟢 All four present.
12.3 Items are as concise as possible; no explanations, effect sizes, qualifiers, or mechanisms. 🟢 Terse benefit labels only.
12.4 Parenthetical content is stripped, NOT preserved. 🟢 “(ALT & AST)” stripped from liver-enzyme item.
12.5 If no items of a sub-section are present, the SPAN is set to display=none. 🟢 benefits_high set to display:none (ER reports no High benefits).

13. Risks

# Description Result Comments
13.1 The section is derived from the ER Potential Risks & Side Effects section. 🟢 Maps to ER lines 241–287.
13.2 Key variables are [risks_high], [risks_medium], [risks_low], [risks_speculative]. 🟢 All four present.
13.3 Items are as concise as possible; no explanations, effect sizes, qualifiers, or mechanisms. 🟢 Terse risk labels only.
13.4 Parenthetical content is stripped, NOT preserved. 🟢 No frequencies/parentheticals carried over.
13.5 If no items of a sub-section are present, the SPAN is set to display=none. 🟢 risks_high set to display:none (ER reports no High risks).

14. Monitoring

# Description Result Comments
14.1 The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section. 🟢 Maps to ER monitoring table (lines 418–426).
14.2 All measurable/quantifiable biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed. 🟢 ALT, AST, GGT, HbA1c, fasting glucose, lipid panel, hs-CRP — all 7 present with targets.
14.3 [monitoring_cadence] is populated with the cadence from the ER Monitoring. 🟢 Baseline; retest ~8–12 weeks; then every 6–12 months (ER line 412).

15. Qualitative Assessment

# Description Result Comments
15.1 The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section. 🟢 Drawn from ER qualitative markers (lines 430–432).
15.2 All subjective/qualitative biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed. 🟢 Energy levels, digestive comfort, alcohol-/medication-related symptoms.

Issues 07/07/2026 00:58

Pass rate 100.00%. No issues found.