Audit: QRS - Neem for Health & Longevity

Audit conducted on 20/08/2026 10:15 using AI4L / Opus 5

Iterations

Summary

Items	Count
Total	93
Passed	83
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.	🟢	Protocol doses (125–500 mg, 30–60 mg, ~2% rinse), time-to-effect values, all eight biomarker targets and “why” strings, cadence, benefit/risk tier items, gate items and the at-a-glance all trace to ER lines 302–319, 334–338, 368–370, 388–408 and 423–427.
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.	🟢	The ER’s hedging is carried through where it is retained: “unrepeated trials touch blood sugar and ulcers” and “appear well tolerated for a few months” mirror ER lines 425 and 427; elsewhere the tier label carries the evidence strength.
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”).	🟢	Contraindications remain contraindications (pregnancy, conception, breastfeeding, transplant, surgery window) and cautions remain cautions; no category was moved across the stop/caution boundary.
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.	🟢	Gate content comes only from Key Interactions & Contraindications; benefits only from Expected Benefits; risks only from Potential Risks & Side Effects. No Benefit- or Risk-Modifying Factor bullet appears anywhere on the sheet.
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.	🟢	The QRS contains no PMIDs, no NCT identifiers, no author or expert names and no brand names.
1.6	The QRS does not introduce new attributions.	🟢	No attributions of any kind are introduced; the ER’s institutional attributions (Manipal, Davangere, Nizam’s Institute) are correctly omitted rather than restated.

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, evidence-weighted register matching the ER: strong where the ER is strong (oral hygiene), explicitly thin where the ER is thin (single unreplicated trials).
2.2	The tone of the QRS is simultaneously expert, accessible, objective, and data-driven, but also empowering and encouraging	🟢	Quantified targets and dose windows sit alongside plain-language framing; the sheet gives the reader what is needed to act rather than only warnings.
2.3	The QRS reads as a trusted, knowledgeable guide rather than a prescriptive doctor	🟢	Content is stated as evidence and observed ranges; no imperative instruction to the reader appears anywhere in the QRS content spans.
2.4	The QRS avoids language that implies medical or clinical advice	🟢	No “should”, “must”, “recommend” or “advise” appears in any content span (line 130 is a CSS comment in the inherited template).
2.5	The QRS “presents information” instead of “providing guidance”, “recommending”, or “advising”	🟢	Protocol cells present the regimens used in the trials (“125–500 mg twice daily”), not instructions to take them.
2.6	The QRS never addresses “the reader” directly — it presents evidence, not guidance	🟢	No second-person pronoun occurs anywhere in the file.
2.7	The QRS is written in plain language, avoiding unnecessary medical jargon	🟢	Biomarker names are spelled out in full (alanine aminotransferase, estimated glomerular filtration rate, international normalised ratio); the remaining technical terms (CYP3A4, Child-Pugh) are load-bearing decision-gate identifiers.
2.8	Information is presented in a concise and very compact manner	🟢	Benefit and risk tiers are collapsed to semicolon-separated key facts; gate items carry qualifier plus fact and nothing else.
2.9	It DOES NOT address the reader directly	🟢	Confirmed by full-file search for second-person forms; none present.
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.	🟢	The sheet assumes a reader who will run a baseline panel, track eight markers and observe a 12-week ceiling.
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.	🟢	Semen analysis, repeat liver/kidney panels and an INR check are presented without hedging about inconvenience.
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.	🟢	Functional ranges rather than conventional laboratory cutoffs are used throughout the Monitoring table, which is a proactive-optimizer frame.
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 at-a-glance leads with the one well-supported use and immediately isolates the preparation-specific hazard (seed oil versus leaf/bark), which is the decision that matters for this 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.	🟢	The string “anti-aging” does not appear; the title uses “Health & Longevity”.
2.15	The document’s own voice uses formal clinical and scientific terminology, not colloquial or consumer-grade language (e.g., “oral medication” not “pill(s)”; “injection” not “shot”; “adverse event” not “bad reaction”). Direct quotes from sources are exempt.	🟢	No “pill”, “shot” or similar consumer-grade term appears; the plainer terms used (“blood sugar”, “gum inflammation”, “loose stools”) are the ER’s own wording at lines 268, 403, 407 and 423.

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 verbatim at lines 446, 489, 538, 541–557, 565, 583, 608, 612–630, 637, 641–643, 768.
3.2	All “…” from the [qrs_template] are present in the the QRS.	🟢	A name-by-name diff against the template returns no missing variable; the only differences are the expected instantiations of the repeatable marker_#_* and qualitative_item_# rows.
3.3	Spans that are not addressed in a checklist item are left unchanged	🟢	A structural diff of the QRS against the template, with variable contents masked, shows only the metadata block and the repeated Monitoring/Qualitative rows; the <span website="..."> placeholders, CSS and footer disclaimer are byte-identical to the template.

4. Formatting

#	Description	Result	Comments
4.1	When the source ER section is empty, the QRS uses the ER’s own empty-state phrasing verbatim. Typical phrasings are “None documented in human trials to date” and “Not formally studied”	N/A	No ER section drawn on by 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.	🟢	“Standard oral protocol”, “Standard oral hygiene protocol”, “Best time of day”, “Time to effect — oral hygiene”, “Time to effect — metabolic” and “Time to effect — gastric” match the ER bold labels at lines 334, 335, 338 and 368–370 exactly.
4.3	Labels are not paraphrased, abbreviated, or invented.	🟢	Key Interaction labels and all eight biomarker names reproduce the ER strings without paraphrase.
4.4	The QRS DOES NOT use emoji indicators (no 🟩, 🟥, 🟨, etc.). Color and emphasis are conveyed through CSS and bold labels.	🟢	No emoji character occurs in the file; the ER’s “⚠️ Conflicted” marker on the surgical wound benefit was correctly dropped.
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.	🟢	The template’s A4 print rules are intact and every over-long ER section was condensed rather than carried over: eight Low-tier benefits reduced to short noun phrases, four Low-tier risks likewise, and each gate item stripped to qualifier plus fact.

---

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; the next comment does not open until 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, with only the comment-opening caption before it.
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 inside an HTML comment and no metadata value is echoed by any element in <body>.
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, correctly, because it contains a colon.
5.5	The filename of the source ER is stated as “er_filename: [er_filename]”	🟢	Line 4: er_filename: neem_2026-0825-0851_Opus_ER.md, matching the ER frontmatter filename at ER line 17.
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: 2026-0820-0955, correct format.
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 with no trailing qualifier.
5.12	The filename of the document is stated as “qrs_filename: [filename of this document]”	🟢	Line 9: qrs_filename: neem_2026-0825-0851_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.	🟢	All nine values are trimmed; only the colon-bearing duration value carries quotes.

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: “Neem for Health & Longevity - Quick Reference Sheet”, matching ER canonical_topic with the ampersand 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: “Neem for Health & Longevity”.
6.3	[header_subline_date] is set to [qrs_creation_date reformatted as MM/DD/YYYY]	🟢	Line 421: “08/20/2026”, the correct reformatting of 2026-0820-0955.
6.4	[header_subline_model] is set to [qrs_creator_ai_fullname]	🟢	Line 425: “Opus 5”, matching the 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 holds only the title and the template subline; no alternate-names line (the ER lists eight) and no badge or audit stamp were added.

7. At-A-Glance Section

#	Description	Result	Comments
7.1	[at_a_glance] is dense, execution-oriented summary of the ER Conclusion section	🟢	It compresses all three substantive Conclusion paragraphs (ER lines 423, 425, 427) into the decision that matters: where the evidence holds, where it is unreplicated, and which preparation carries the hazard.
7.2	[at_a_glance] is no longer than 60 words	🟢	Exactly 60 words, at the limit.
7.3	Every fact in [at_a_glance] is supported by a distinct passage in the ER.	🟢	Oral evidence → ER line 423; unreplicated blood sugar and ulcer trials → line 425; tolerability, seed-oil illness in infants and animal antifertility → line 427.
7.4	It DOES NOT use acronyms or technical classifications that require specialist knowledge, uses plain-language terms instead	🟢	Uses “in the mouth”, “plaque”, “gum inflammation”, “blood sugar”, “ulcers”, “leaf and bark preparations”, “block fertility”; no acronym and no clinical-register term appears.
7.5	It DOES NOT cite specific trials (names, years, sample sizes, p-values)	🟢	No trial name, year, sample size or p-value appears.
7.6	It DOES NOT cite effect sizes, relative risks, or statistical results	🟢	No numeric effect measure appears; comparison is qualitative (“about as well as standard products”).

8. Contraindications

#	Description	Result	Comments
8.1	The section is derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section	🟢	All eight items map to ER lines 306 and 313–319.
8.2	[stop_items] represent the Contraindications from the ER	🟢	The seven “Populations who should avoid Neem” bullets plus the aspirin/salicylate absolute contraindication in children (ER line 306) are all present.
8.3	Individual [stop_items] are formatted as <li></li>	🟢	Eight <li> elements at lines 568–578.
8.4	Items are as concise as possible. No trailing explanations, no elaborations, no mechanistic rationale, no attributions, no citations, no study details. No content after an em-dash, en-dash, or hyphen-dash (e.g., “— dose reduction required”, “— reduced efficacy”) — these trailing clauses are stripped. Just the key fact.	🟢	Every ER trailing clause is stripped (“given the encephalopathy risk”, “animal implantation blockade and embryotoxicity”, “no dosing data and a documented animal organ-toxicity signal”, “additive bleeding and glycaemic effects”); the only hyphens remaining are inside compound words such as “Solid-organ” and “pre-conception”.
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).	🟢	“under 12”, “(oral seed oil)”, “at any stage”, “(Child-Pugh B or C)”, “stage 4+ (under 30 mL/min/1.73 m²)” and “within 2 weeks of planned surgery” are all carried through.
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 bullets use no ranking notation inside parentheses.
8.7	The section is left empty ONLY IF the ER’s Key Interactions & Contraindications section identifies no population, condition, or scenario for which the intervention should be avoided, deferred, or used only under specialist supervision.	🟢	The section is populated, and the ER does identify such populations, so the constraint holds.
8.8	If the section is left empty, an HTML comment inside the [stop_items] span records the ER basis for the absence, naming or quoting the ER text relied on. E.g.	N/A	The section is not empty.

9. Key Interactions

#	Description	Result	Comments
9.1	The section is derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section	🟢	All seven items map to ER lines 302–305 and 307–309.
9.2	[caution_items] represent the Key Interactions from the ER, excluding any that are already listed as Contraindications	🟢	Seven of the ER’s eight interaction bullets appear; the eighth (“Aspirin and salicylates”, an absolute contraindication in children) is correctly routed to the Contraindications gate instead.
9.3	Individual [caution_items] are formatted as <li></li>	🟢	Seven <li> elements at lines 586–598.
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.	🟢	All ER mitigation sentences (“increase blood glucose self-monitoring”, “check the international normalised ratio weekly”, “Sequential rather than simultaneous use”) are stripped; each item is label plus example list only.
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).	🟢	Named drugs are preserved for every item: insulin/sulfonylureas/meglitinides/metformin, tacrolimus/ciclosporin/sirolimus/apixaban/rivaroxaban, warfarin/phenytoin/sulfonylureas, paracetamol/ibuprofen/naproxen, the five glucose-lowering supplements, the four bleeding-tendency supplements, and chlorhexidine mouthrinse.
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; all parenthetical content is already comma-separated.
9.7	The section is left empty ONLY IF the ER’s Key Interactions & Contraindications section identifies no interaction, additive effect, or exposure that changes how the intervention is used.	🟢	The section is populated and the ER identifies eight such bullets, so the constraint holds.
9.8	If the section is left empty, an HTML comment inside the [caution_items] span records the ER basis for the absence, naming or quoting the ER text relied on. E.g.	N/A	The section is not empty.

10. Protocol

#	Description	Result	Comments
10.1	The section is derived from the ER Protocol section	🟢	All three cells trace to ER Therapeutic Protocol lines 334, 335 and 338.
10.2	The three sets of [action] items cover the three most important actionable implementation aspects from the ER Protocol section	🟢	Dose/preparation, oral-hygiene route and timing are the only three bullets in that section that are directly executable; the remainder (competing approaches, popularisers, half-life, modifiers) are contextual.
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 at least three distinct actionable aspects, so 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 of nine variables carry ER-derived content; the sub-lines correctly drop the ER’s study attributions (“the range validated in the metabolic syndrome trial”) while keeping the executable detail.

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 states exactly three time-to-effect bullets (oral hygiene, metabolic, gastric) at lines 368–370; all three are present.
11.2	The sets are picked and ordered by the magnitude of the related benefit	🟢	Oral hygiene (High tier) first, then metabolic and gastric (both Low tier) in the ER’s own order within that tier.
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 exactly three time-to-effect aspects, so 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.	🟢	“2 to 6 weeks”, “8 to 12 weeks” and “10 days” with their supporting sub-lines all restate ER lines 368–370 without adding anything.
11.5	If the ER does not provide any information on time to effect, the section is removed completely from the Protocol Panel	N/A	The ER does provide time-to-effect information, so the section is retained.

12. Benefits

#	Description	Result	Comments
12.1	The section is derived from the ER Expected Benefits section	🟢	All twelve benefit entries map one-to-one to the ER’s twelve Expected Benefits sub-headings.
12.2	Key variables are [benefits_high], [benefits_medium], [benefits_low], [benefits_speculative]	🟢	All four spans present and populated at lines 540–558.
12.3	Items are as concise as possible. No explanations, no elaborations, no effect sizes, no qualifiers, no attributions, no citations, no study details, no mechanistic explanations, etc. Just the key fact.	🟢	Each ER heading is reduced to its shortest identifying phrase (“Glycemic Control and Insulin Sensitivity in Metabolic Syndrome” → “Glycemic control and insulin sensitivity”; “Ectoparasite Burden and Lesion Pain in Sand Flea Disease” → “sand flea lesion pain”), and no Magnitude figure is carried across.
12.4	Parenthetical content — including effect sizes, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved.	🟢	No parenthesis occurs in any of the four benefit spans.
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 tiers carry items in the ER, 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 eight risk entries map one-to-one to the ER’s eight risk sub-headings at lines 240–290.
13.2	Key variables are [risks_high], [risks_medium], [risks_low], [risks_speculative]	🟢	All four spans present and populated at lines 610–631.
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.	🟢	Headings are carried in condensed form with all Magnitude detail (IC50 values, adverse-event grades, dilution percentages) omitted.
13.4	Parenthetical content — including frequencies, severity grades, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved.	🟢	No parenthesis occurs in any of the four risk spans.
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 tiers carry items in the ER, so no span needed hiding.

14. Monitoring

#	Description	Result	Comments
14.1	The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section	🟢	The table reproduces the ER Monitoring Protocol & Defining Success biomarker table at lines 390–399.
14.2	All measurable/quantifiable biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed	🟢	All eight ER biomarkers are present with their optimal functional ranges verbatim: ALT, AST, fasting glucose, glycated haemoglobin, eGFR, complete blood count, semen concentration and motility, and international normalised ratio.
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 760 reproduces the ER cadence paragraph (line 388) including the shorter-interval condition for seed oil and above-trial doses.

15. Qualitative Assessment

#	Description	Result	Comments
15.1	The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section	🟢	All six items map to the ER’s “Qualitative markers worth tracking alongside the labs” list at lines 403–408.
15.2	All subjective/qualitative biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed	🟢	All six are present: gum bleeding, breath quality and film on teeth, post-meal energy, heartburn frequency and antacid use, nausea/bitterness aversion/loose stools, and topical skin tolerance.

Issues 20/08/2026 10:15

Pass rate 100.00%. No issues found.

Issues 20/08/2026 10:07

1. 1.1 — Benefit entries name conditions: In benefits_low (lines 550–554) “sand flea disease” and “superficial fungal skin infection” name diseases rather than the benefits the ER states — “Ectoparasite Burden and Lesion Pain in Sand Flea Disease” and “Superficial Fungal Skin Infection Clearance”.
2. 1.2 — Rinse concentration hedge dropped: action_2_value (line 466) reads “2% rinse twice daily”, but the ER hedges the figure in both places it appears: “a neem rinse at roughly 2%” and “typically around 2% for rinses”.

Fixes 20/08/2026 10:07

1. 1.1 — Benefit entries name conditions: In benefits_low, “sand flea disease” became “sand flea lesion pain” and “superficial fungal skin infection” became “fungal skin infection clearance”, so both entries state the ER’s benefit rather than the disease.
2. 1.2 — Rinse concentration hedge dropped: action_2_value changed from “2% rinse twice daily” to “Roughly 2% rinse twice daily”, restoring the ER’s hedge on the concentration.

Issues 20/08/2026 10:01

1. 4.5 — Blocks not condensed to page budget: benefits_low (lines 549–557) reproduces all nine ER Low-tier benefit headings at full length, and the liver/kidney contraindication (lines 576–579) and monitoring_cadence (lines 761–765) each carry ER prose that renders to three lines, pushing the sheet past the one-A4-page budget.

Fixes 20/08/2026 10:01

1. 4.5 — Benefits Low tier condensed: Trimmed the nine Low-tier entries to their key facts, dropping population and context qualifiers (“in metabolic syndrome”, “ectoparasite burden and lesion pain in”, “in reopened surgical wounds”, “in untreated viral immunodeficiency”), reducing the block from roughly four rendered lines to two.
2. 4.5 — Liver/kidney contraindication shortened: Condensed to “Decompensated liver disease (Child-Pugh B or C) or chronic kidney disease stage 4+ (under 30 mL/min/1.73 m²)”, keeping every threshold and staging qualifier while cutting a rendered line from the Contraindications gate.
3. 4.5 — Monitoring cadence tightened: Rewrote the cadence sentence to “Liver and kidney markers at 6–8 weeks, then every 3–6 months; glucose markers at 12 weeks, then every 6 months. Seed oil or above-trial doses use the shorter interval.”, preserving all intervals in one fewer rendered line.