Audit: QRS - PE-22-28 for Health & Longevity

Audit conducted on 02/10/2026 02:59 using AI4L / Opus 5.5

Iterations

Summary

Items	Count
Total	94
Passed	88
Failed	0
N/A	6
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, time-to-effect, benefits, risks, gates, markers and cadence all trace to ER text (Therapeutic Protocol, Practical Considerations, Expected Benefits, Potential Risks, Key Interactions & Contraindications, Monitoring Protocol).
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.	🟢	“theoretical” kept on every interaction; “no numeric threshold given” and “common practice for an unstudied compound, not a trial” carried over.
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”).	🟢
1.4	The QRS does not relabel an ER fact under a different decision category. A “Benefit-Modifying Factor” from ER section is not surfaced as a “Caution”; a “Risk-Modifying Factor” is not surfaced as a “Side Effect”; etc.	🟢	Contraindications come from the ER avoid-list; interactions from the interaction bullets; no modifying factors relabelled.
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, citations, NCT IDs, expert or brand names on the sheet.
1.6	The QRS does not introduce new attributions.	🟢

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.	🟢
2.2	The tone of the QRS is simultaneously expert, accessible, objective, and data-driven, but also empowering and encouraging	🟢
2.3	The QRS reads as a trusted, knowledgeable guide rather than a prescriptive doctor	🟢
2.4	The QRS avoids language that implies medical or clinical advice	🟢
2.5	The QRS “presents information” instead of “providing guidance”, “recommending”, or “advising”	🟢
2.6	The QRS never addresses “the reader” directly — it presents evidence, not guidance	🟢	No second-person address found.
2.7	The QRS is written in plain language, avoiding unnecessary medical jargon	🟢	Technical routes glossed (intraperitoneal, gavage); remaining technical terms are ER labels or necessary identifiers.
2.8	Information is presented in a concise and very compact manner	🟢
2.9	It DOES NOT address the reader directly	🟢
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.	🟢
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.	🟢
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.	🟢
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.	🟢
2.14	The document’s own voice frames usage in longevity terms, not “anti-aging” (e.g., “anti-aging clinics”, “anti-aging community”, “anti-aging medicine”). Proper names that contain “anti-aging” (e.g., “American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine”) are quoted verbatim.	🟢	No “anti-aging” wording.
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)”; “oral” / “administered orally” not “taken by mouth” / “given by mouth”; “injection” not “shot”; “adverse event” not “bad reaction”). This holds on EVERY surface, including the QRS lede — the stricter plain-language bar (see 2.7) does not license lay phrasing for route of administration. Direct quotes from sources are exempt.	🟢	“injection”, “intranasal spray”, “oral dosing” used; no lay route phrasing.

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”	🟢
3.2	All “…” from the [qrs_template] are present in the the QRS.	🟢	All template spans present; marker_# and qualitative_item_# expanded to 1–4 and 1–6.
3.3	Spans that are not addressed in a checklist item are left unchanged	🟢	Diff against template shows only addressed spans changed.

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”	🟢	Only empty ER tiers (Benefits/Risks High, Medium, Low) map to the sheet; these are hidden per 12.5/13.5.
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.	🟢	Protocol labels “Published animal regimen”, “Amounts reported in private practice”, “Competing route approaches” are verbatim ER bold labels.
4.3	Labels are not paraphrased, abbreviated, or invented.	🟢
4.4	The QRS DOES NOT use emoji indicators (no 🟩, 🟥, 🟨, etc.). Color and emphasis are conveyed through CSS and bold labels.	🟢	No emoji found; ⚠️ Conflicted markers from ER risk headings omitted.
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.	🟢

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.	🟢
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.	🟢
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.	🟢
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.	🟢
5.5	The filename of the source ER is stated as “er_filename: [er_filename]”	🟢
5.6	Version of the QRS.md file used to create the document is stated as “qrs_prompt_version: [Version of QRS.md]”	🟢	26.10.1 matches 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)	🟢	2026-1002-0220
5.8	The nickname of the AI used to create the document is stated as “qrs_creator_ai_nickname: [qrs_creator_ai_nickname]”	🟢
5.9	The nickname of the AI is just a single word model name without version, etc. (e.g., Opus, Sonnet, Grok, Gemini, ChatGPT)	🟢
5.10	The full name of the AI used to create the document is stated as “qrs_creator_ai_fullname: [qrs_creator_ai_fullname]”	🟢
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)	🟢
5.12	The filename of the document is stated as “qrs_filename: [filename of this document]”	🟢
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.	🟢

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 &)	🟢
6.2	[header_topic] is set to the [canonical_topic] of the ER frontmatter, with HTML entities encoded as needed (e.g., & for &)	🟢
6.3	[header_subline_date] is set to [qrs_creation_date reformatted as MM/DD/YYYY]	🟢	10/02/2026
6.4	[header_subline_model] is set to [qrs_creator_ai_fullname]	🟢
6.5	No additional header content appears: no badge, version stamp, AKA / alternate names line, source-AI attribution, audit date, or QRS variant marker.	🟢

7. At-A-Glance Section

#	Description	Result	Comments
7.1	[at_a_glance] opens by saying what the intervention is — its kind (e.g., dietary supplement, prescription medication, peptide, plant, procedure, practice) — and what it is used for, in plain language, before any verdict on the evidence	🟢	Opens “PE-22-28 is a laboratory-made peptide, sold online and by private clinics for mood and brain function.”
7.2	[at_a_glance] is dense, execution-oriented summary of the ER Conclusion section	🟢
7.3	[at_a_glance] is no longer than 70 words	🟢	68 words.
7.4	Every fact in [at_a_glance] is supported by a distinct passage in the ER.	🟢
7.5	It DOES NOT use acronyms or technical classifications that require specialist knowledge, uses plain-language terms instead	🟢
7.6	It DOES NOT cite specific trials (names, years, sample sizes, p-values)	🟢
7.7	It DOES NOT cite effect sizes, relative risks, or statistical results	🟢

8. Contraindications

#	Description	Result	Comments
8.1	The section is derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section	🟢
8.2	[stop_items] represent the Contraindications from the ER	🟢	All nine ER avoid-populations present.
8.3	Individual [stop_items] are formatted as <li></li>	🟢
8.4	Items are as concise as possible. No trailing explanations, no elaborations, no mechanistic rationale, no attributions, no citations, no study details. No content after an em-dash, en-dash, or hyphen-dash (e.g., “— dose reduction required”, “— reduced efficacy”) — these trailing clauses are stripped. Just the key fact.	🟢	Trailing rationales (“given the unquantified proliferative signal”, “where the animal data point to…”) 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).	🟢	“(no numeric threshold given)” preserved.
8.6	When the ER uses ranking notation inside parens (e.g., “>” for severity ordering) that depends on an explanatory phrase to interpret, normalize the items to a plain comma-separated list rather than carrying through the bare symbol.	N/A	ER uses no ranking notation in contraindications.
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.	🟢	Section populated; ER names populations to avoid.
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	Section is not empty.

9. Key Interactions

#	Description	Result	Comments
9.1	The section is derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section	🟢
9.2	[caution_items] represent the Key Interactions from the ER, excluding any that are already listed as Contraindications	🟢	Insulin/insulin-releasing medicines omitted as already a contraindication.
9.3	Individual [caution_items] are formatted as <li></li>	🟢
9.4	Items are as concise as possible. No trailing explanations, no elaborations, no mechanistic rationale, no attributions, no citations, no study details. No content after an em-dash, en-dash, or hyphen-dash (e.g., “— dose reduction required”, “— reduced efficacy”) — these trailing clauses are stripped. Just the key fact.	🟢
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 trimmed but kept; severity classes preserved.
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	ER uses no ranking notation in interactions.
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.	🟢	Section populated; ER names interactions.
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	Section is not empty.

10. Protocol

#	Description	Result	Comments
10.1	The section is derived from the ER Protocol section	🟢
10.2	The three sets of [action] items cover the three most important actionable implementation aspects from the ER Protocol section	🟢
10.3	If less that three distinct actionable implementation aspects are mentioned in the ER the unused sets are left empty and made invisible, not filled with placeholder text or empty-state phrasing.	N/A	Three distinct actionable aspects exist and are used.
10.4	All used [action_#label], [action#value], [action#_sub] items are filled with meaningful content derived from the ER Protocol section.	🟢

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	🟢
11.2	The sets are picked and ordered by the magnitude of the related benefit	🟢
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.	🟢	Only two time-to-effect aspects in ER; time_3 set empty and hidden.
11.4	All used [time_#label], [time#value], [time#_sub] items are filled with meaningful content derived from the ER.	🟢
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	ER provides time-to-effect information.

12. Benefits

#	Description	Result	Comments
12.1	The section is derived from the ER Expected Benefits section	🟢
12.2	Key variables are [benefits_high], [benefits_medium], [benefits_low], [benefits_speculative]	🟢
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.	🟢
12.4	Parenthetical content — including effect sizes, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved.	🟢
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.	🟢	High, Medium, Low spans set to display: none.

13. Risks

#	Description	Result	Comments
13.1	The section is derived from the ER Potential Risks & Side Effects section	🟢
13.2	Key variables are [risks_high], [risks_medium], [risks_low], [risks_speculative]	🟢
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.	🟢
13.4	Parenthetical content — including frequencies, severity grades, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved.	🟢
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.	🟢	High, Medium, Low spans set to display: none.

14. Monitoring

#	Description	Result	Comments
14.1	The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section	🟢
14.2	All measurable/quantifiable biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed	🟢	All four ER biomarkers listed.
14.3	[monitoring_cadence] is populated with the monitoring cadence/frequency derived from the ER Monitoring section. It is not left with placeholder text or empty.	🟢

15. Qualitative Assessment

#	Description	Result	Comments
15.1	The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section	🟢
15.2	All subjective/qualitative biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed	🟢	All six ER qualitative markers listed.

Issues 02/10/2026 02:59

Pass rate 100.00%. No issues found.

Issues 02/10/2026 02:55

1. 2.7 — Unexplained intraperitoneal route term: Line 450 (action_1_sub) uses “intraperitoneal injection” without explanation while the adjacent “gavage” is glossed; the ER glosses it as “(into the abdominal cavity)”.

Fixes 02/10/2026 02:55

1. 2.7 — Unexplained intraperitoneal route term: Added the ER’s gloss to action_1_sub, changing “intraperitoneal injection” to “intraperitoneal injection (into the abdominal cavity)”.

Issues 02/10/2026 02:52

1. 2.6 / 2.9 — Imperative addressed to reader: Line 632 marker_3_target “No established target; compare with own pre-exposure recording” uses an imperative directed at the reader instead of presenting the ER’s framing (“track … against the individual’s own pre-exposure recording”, ER line 423).
2. 2.15 — Lay route-of-administration phrasing: Line 450 action_1_sub reads “1 mg/kg orally by stomach tube”, a lay rendering of the ER’s formal route “by gavage (tube into the stomach)” (ER line 334).

Fixes 02/10/2026 02:52

1. 2.6 / 2.9 — Reader-directed imperative removed: Changed marker_3_target from “No established target; compare with own pre-exposure recording” to “No established target; tracked against the individual’s own pre-exposure recording”, following the ER wording.
2. 2.15 — Formal route terminology: Changed action_1_sub “1 mg/kg orally by stomach tube” to “1 mg/kg by gavage (tube into the stomach)”, matching the ER’s Therapeutic Protocol wording.

Issues 02/10/2026 02:49

1. 2.7 — Unexplained specialist jargon: “by gavage” in [action_1_sub] (line 450) and “Bradycardia” in [stop_items] (line 543) are left as specialist terms although the ER supplies plain equivalents (“tube into the stomach” / oral dosing; “abnormally slow heart rate”).

Fixes 02/10/2026 02:49

1. 2.7 — Replaced unexplained specialist jargon: Changed “1 mg/kg by gavage” to “1 mg/kg orally by stomach tube” in [action_1_sub], and “Bradycardia” to “Abnormally slow heart rate” in [stop_items], both per the ER’s own plain wording.

Issues 02/10/2026 02:47

1. 2.15 — Lay route-of-administration phrasing: action_1_sub (line 450) reads “injection into the abdominal cavity” and “orally via stomach tube” where the ER uses the formal “intraperitoneal injection” and “gavage”.
2. 4.5 — Not condensed to one page: The nine Key Interactions keep full 3–4-name example lists (lines 558-566), and the Monitoring “Why” cells (lines 613-646) and cadence (line 653) keep long rationale clauses, so the sheet clearly runs past one A4 page.

Fixes 02/10/2026 02:47

1. 2.15 — Formal route terminology: Changed action_1_sub from “injection into the abdominal cavity … orally via stomach tube” to “intraperitoneal injection … by gavage”, matching the ER’s formal terms.
2. 4.5 — Condensed for one page: Cut the Key Interactions example lists to two names each (severity classes and “theoretical” kept), removed the rationale clauses from Monitoring “Why” cells 1, 2 and 4, shortened the cadence first sentence, and shortened the epilepsy qualifier to “(no numeric threshold given)”.

Issues 02/10/2026 02:42

1. 2.7 — Unglossed route-of-administration jargon: action_1_sub (line 450) reads “Mice, intraperitoneal injection, or 1 mg/kg by gavage”, using two specialist terms the ER itself glosses (“into the abdominal cavity”, “tube into the stomach”).
2. 12.3 — Species qualifiers in benefit items: benefits_speculative (line 531) keeps the qualifiers “in Rodents” (“Rapid Antidepressant-Like Behaviour in Rodents”) and “in Rats” (“Lower Brain Inflammation Signalling in Rats”), although the Speculative tier already encodes evidence strength.

Fixes 02/10/2026 02:42

1. 2.7 — Unglossed route-of-administration jargon: Changed action_1_sub from “intraperitoneal injection, or 1 mg/kg by gavage” to “injection into the abdominal cavity, or 1 mg/kg orally via stomach tube”, following the ER’s own glosses.
2. 12.3 — Species qualifiers in benefit items: Removed “in Rodents” and “in Rats” from the benefits_speculative items, which now read “Rapid Antidepressant-Like Behaviour” and “Lower Brain Inflammation Signalling”.

Issues 02/10/2026 02:39

1. 2.15 — Lay route-of-administration phrasing: action_1_sub (line 450) reads “injection into the abdominal cavity” and “by tube into the stomach” instead of the formal terms “intraperitoneal injection” and “gavage” used in the ER Therapeutic Protocol.

Fixes 02/10/2026 02:39

1. 2.15 — Formal route terminology: Changed action_1_sub from “injection into the abdominal cavity … by tube into the stomach” to “intraperitoneal injection … by gavage”, matching the ER Therapeutic Protocol terms.

Issues 02/10/2026 02:36

1. 2.7 — Unexplained route-of-administration jargon: action_1_sub (line 450) reads “Mice, intraperitoneal injection, or 1 mg/kg by gavage” without the plain-language glosses the ER gives at line 334 (“into the abdominal cavity”, “tube into the stomach”).
2. 13.3 — Mechanistic qualifiers in risk names: risks_speculative (line 588) retains explanations/qualifiers such as “From Increased Insulin Release”, “From Lower Channel Function”, “in Tissues Carrying the Channel” and “Under Pressure Load”.

Fixes 02/10/2026 02:36

1. 2.7 — Unexplained route-of-administration jargon: Replaced “intraperitoneal injection, or 1 mg/kg by gavage” in action_1_sub with the ER’s own glosses: “injection into the abdominal cavity, or 1 mg/kg by tube into the stomach”.
2. 13.3 — Mechanistic qualifiers in risk names: Stripped qualifiers from risks_speculative items, e.g. “Low Blood Sugar From Increased Insulin Release” to “Low Blood Sugar”, “Atrial Rhythm Disturbance From Lower Channel Function” to “Atrial Rhythm Disturbance”, and likewise for cardiac remodelling and cell growth.

Issues 02/10/2026 02:33

1. 2.7 — Unglossed jargon in risks: Risks speculative item (line 588) reads “Hypoglycaemia From Increased Insulin Release”, dropping the ER’s plain gloss “(Low Blood Sugar)” while the rest of the QRS uses “low blood sugar”.
2. 2.15 — Lay route-of-administration phrasing: action_1_sub (line 450) uses “by injection into the abdominal cavity” and “by stomach tube” instead of the ER’s formal “intraperitoneal injection” and “gavage”.

Fixes 02/10/2026 02:33

1. 2.7 — Unglossed jargon in risks: Changed risks speculative item “Hypoglycaemia From Increased Insulin Release” to “Low Blood Sugar From Increased Insulin Release”, using the ER’s own plain gloss.
2. 2.15 — Lay route-of-administration phrasing: Changed action_1_sub from “by injection into the abdominal cavity … by stomach tube” to “intraperitoneal injection … by gavage”, matching the ER’s formal terms.

Issues 02/10/2026 02:30

1. 2.7 — Lab jargon in protocol cell: action_1_sub (line 450) reads “Mice, by intraperitoneal injection, or 1 mg/kg by gavage”, leaving two specialist route terms unexplained although the ER glosses them as “into the abdominal cavity” and “tube into the stomach”.

Fixes 02/10/2026 02:30

1. 2.7 — Lab jargon in protocol cell: Changed action_1_sub from “by intraperitoneal injection, or 1 mg/kg by gavage” to “by injection into the abdominal cavity, or 1 mg/kg by stomach tube”, using the ER’s own glosses.

Issues 02/10/2026 02:25

1. 7.2 — Conclusion COI caveat missing: The at_a_glance text (QRS line 433) omits the ER Conclusion’s key evidence-base caveat (ER line 461) that almost all of the record comes from the single laboratory whose institutions hold the patent.

Fixes 02/10/2026 02:25

1. 7.2 — Conclusion COI caveat added: Rewrote at_a_glance to state that the animal and cell evidence comes almost entirely from the patent-holding laboratory, trimming other wording to stay within 70 words.

Issues 02/10/2026 02:22

1. 2.15 — Lay phrasing for routes: action_1_sub (QRS line 450) reads “by injection into the abdominal cavity, or 1 mg/kg by stomach tube” instead of the formal route terms “intraperitoneal injection” and “gavage” used in the ER Therapeutic Protocol.
2. 11.1 / 11.3 — Duration shown as time-to-effect: The third Time to effect set (QRS lines 503-513, “Duration of behavioural effect” / “14–23 hours”) is a half-effect duration, not a time to effect; the ER offers only two distinct time-to-effect aspects, so this set should be left empty and made invisible.

Fixes 02/10/2026 02:22

1. 2.15 — Formal route terminology: Changed action_1_sub from “by injection into the abdominal cavity, or 1 mg/kg by stomach tube” to “by intraperitoneal injection, or 1 mg/kg by gavage”, matching the ER’s formal route terms.
2. 11.1 / 11.3 — Removed duration-of-effect cell: Emptied the time_3_label, time_3_value and time_3_sub spans and hid the third Time to effect cell with display: none, since the ER gives only two distinct time-to-effect aspects.