Audit: QRS - Peppermint for Health & Longevity

Audit conducted on 20/08/2026 17:41 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.	🟢	Every populated span traces to ER text: protocol doses to ER Therapeutic Protocol, time-to-effect values to ER Practical Considerations and benefit magnitudes, biomarker rows to the ER monitoring table, gates to Key Interactions & Contraindications.
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.	🟢	marker_2_target keeps “No established target; change from own baseline” and marker_5_why keeps “reported in one trial”, mirroring the ER’s hedges.
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”).	🟢	Tiers, contraindications and interaction severities are carried at the ER’s own strength; the at-a-glance retains the null-trial caveat.
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 only from the ER’s “Populations who should avoid Peppermint” list; interactions only from the ER interaction bullets; no Benefit- or Risk-Modifying Factor is promoted.
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 carries no PMIDs, citations, expert names, NCT identifiers or brand names at all.
1.6	The QRS does not introduce new attributions.	🟢	No attributions of any kind are present.

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.	🟢	British spelling and register match the ER (“quietens”, “gastro-oesophageal”, “non-haem”, “apnoea”).
2.2	The tone of the QRS is simultaneously expert, accessible, objective, and data-driven, but also empowering and encouraging	🟢	Neutral, evidence-led presentation with actionable protocol and monitoring detail.
2.3	The QRS reads as a trusted, knowledgeable guide rather than a prescriptive doctor	🟢	Protocols are presented as the regimens used in the evidence, not as instructions.
2.4	The QRS avoids language that implies medical or clinical advice	🟢	No imperative clinical directives in the document’s own generated content.
2.5	The QRS “presents information” instead of “providing guidance”, “recommending”, or “advising”	🟢	Cells state what was studied and measured; no recommending verbs.
2.6	The QRS never addresses “the reader” directly — it presents evidence, not guidance	🟢	No second-person pronouns in any populated span.
2.7	The QRS is written in plain language, avoiding unnecessary medical jargon	🟢	Technical terms are limited to those the ER itself uses and that the format requires (e.g., CYP3A4 in the interactions gate).
2.8	Information is presented in a concise and very compact manner	🟢	All list items are short noun phrases; monitoring rows are single clauses.
2.9	It DOES NOT address the reader directly	🟢	Confirmed across header, at-a-glance, protocol, gates, benefits, risks, monitoring and qualitative sections.
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 tracking IBS-SSS, ALT, ferritin and reflux scores against a bounded course.
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.	🟢	Three-times-daily pre-meal dosing and a multi-point reassessment cadence are presented without simplification.
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.	🟢	Biomarker targets and interaction detail are pitched well above general-population material.
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 foregrounds the conflicted trial evidence and the dominant harm rather than a promotional summary.
2.14	The document’s own voice frames usage in longevity terms, not “anti-aging” (e.g., “anti-aging clinics”, “anti-aging community”, “anti-aging medicine”). Proper names that contain “anti-aging” (e.g., “American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine”) are quoted verbatim.	🟢	“Longevity” appears only in the canonical topic; “anti-aging” appears nowhere.
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.	🟢	Clinical register throughout; the at-a-glance’s plain phrasing is the ER Conclusion’s own wording and is required by item 7.4.

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 fourteen fixed strings verified verbatim at lines 446, 490, 538, 571, 586, 605, 631, 635-637, and the tier labels in both the Benefits and Risks cards.
3.2	All “…” from the [qrs_template] are present in the the QRS.	🟢	55 named spans present, covering the complete variable set referenced by the checklist (page_title through qualitative_item_6), plus the three unnamed website="…" spans.
3.3	Spans that are not addressed in a checklist item are left unchanged	🟢	website="evidence_review", website="audit" and website="full_review" are untouched.

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 mapped by this template 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.	🟢	Protocol labels “Standard gastroenterology protocol”, “Integrative and European alternative” and “Topical headache protocol” match the ER bold labels verbatim; interaction items reuse the ER’s bold interaction labels.
4.3	Labels are not paraphrased, abbreviated, or invented.	🟢	Biomarker names match the ER monitoring table verbatim; time-to-effect labels are the ER’s own indication names.
4.4	The QRS DOES NOT use emoji indicators (no 🟩, 🟥, 🟨, etc.). Color and emphasis are conveyed through CSS and bold labels.	🟢	No emoji in the file; tiering is conveyed by bold labels and the CSS palettes.
4.5	The QRS is designed to render on one A4 page. Any section that has more content in the ER than fits the per-section budget is condensed by the LLM, not extended onto a second page.	🟢	Six protocol/time cells, four benefit lines, twelve gate items, four risk lines, five biomarker rows and six qualitative items at 9-9.5pt fit the single-sheet budget.

---

5. Metadata

#	Description	Result	Comments
5.1	The metadata is placed inside a single HTML comment that is the first element after “<!doctype html>” and before any other comment, head, or body content.	🟢	Lines 2-14, immediately after the doctype on line 1.
5.2	Inside that HTML comment the YAML block is delimited by a line “—” opening and a line “—” closing. Text before the opening “—” is permitted but is not parsed as YAML.	🟢	Opening “—” on line 3, closing “—” on line 13.
5.3	The metadata is not visible in any rendered view of the QRS and is not surfaced by any other element on the sheet.	🟢	Enclosed in an HTML comment; no metadata value is repeated in the rendered 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: peppermint_2026-0825-1436_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 QRS.md badge.
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: 2026-0820-1659.
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 qualifier.
5.12	The filename of the document is stated as “qrs_filename: [filename of this document]”	🟢	Line 9 matches the file’s actual name.
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; 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: “Peppermint for Health & Longevity - Quick Reference Sheet”.
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: “Peppermint for Health & Longevity”.
6.3	[header_subline_date] is set to [qrs_creation_date reformatted as MM/DD/YYYY]	🟢	Line 421: “08/20/2026”, matching qrs_creation_date 2026-0820.
6.4	[header_subline_model] is set to [qrs_creator_ai_fullname]	🟢	Line 425: “Opus 5”.
6.5	No additional header content appears: no badge, version stamp, AKA / alternate names line, source-AI attribution, audit date, or QRS variant marker.	🟢	Header contains only the title and the template’s fixed subline.

7. At-A-Glance Section

#	Description	Result	Comments
7.1	[at_a_glance] is dense, execution-oriented summary of the ER Conclusion section	🟢	Condenses the ER Conclusion’s four load-bearing points: delivery form and mechanism, the two strongest indications, the conflicted modern trials, and the dominant harm.
7.2	[at_a_glance] is no longer than 60 words	🟢	53 words.
7.3	Every fact in [at_a_glance] is supported by a distinct passage in the ER.	🟢	Each clause maps to a distinct ER Conclusion sentence.
7.4	It DOES NOT use acronyms or technical classifications that require specialist knowledge, uses plain-language terms instead	🟢	No acronyms; “capsules that survive the stomach”, “dummy treatment” and “quietens the nerves reporting pain” replace enteric coating, placebo and visceral afferent modulation.
7.5	It DOES NOT cite specific trials (names, years, sample sizes, p-values)	🟢	No trial names, years or sample sizes.
7.6	It DOES NOT cite effect sizes, relative risks, or statistical results	🟢	No numeric effect estimates.

8. Contraindications

#	Description	Result	Comments
8.1	The section is derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section	🟢	All five items come from the ER’s “Populations who should avoid Peppermint” list.
8.2	[stop_items] represent the Contraindications from the ER	🟢	All five ER contraindications are present, none added.
8.3	Individual [stop_items] are formatted as <li></li>	🟢	Five <li> elements inside the span at lines 573-582.
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 rationale clauses (“where sphincter relaxation directly worsens…”, “given peppermint oil’s bile-stimulating effect”, “because pulegone and menthofuran are hepatically handled”) are all 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).	🟢	“(Los Angeles grade C or D)”, “under 8 years”, “(Child-Pugh Class C)” retained.
8.6	When the ER uses ranking notation inside parens (e.g., “>” for severity ordering) that depends on an explanatory phrase to interpret, normalize the items to a plain comma-separated list rather than carrying through the bare symbol.	N/A	The ER uses no ranking notation in its contraindication parentheticals.
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 ER names five such populations and the section is correctly populated.
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 one-to-one to the ER’s seven interaction bullets.
9.2	[caution_items] represent the Key Interactions from the ER, excluding any that are already listed as Contraindications	🟢	No overlap with the five contraindications.
9.3	Individual [caution_items] are formatted as <li></li>	🟢	Seven <li> elements at lines 588-596.
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 caution grade, mechanism and mitigation sentences are all dropped; only the labelled interaction 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).	🟢	Every ER bullet with a drug list keeps a trimmed exemplar list (felodipine/simvastatin/tacrolimus; omeprazole; calcium carbonate/magnesium hydroxide; ferrous sulfate; magnesium/garlic/beetroot nitrate; hyoscine).
9.6	When the ER uses ranking notation inside parens (e.g., “>” for severity ordering) that depends on an explanatory phrase to interpret, normalize the items to a plain comma-separated list rather than carrying through the bare symbol.	N/A	The ER uses no ranking notation in its interaction parentheticals.
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 ER names seven interactions and the section is correctly populated.
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 derive from the ER Therapeutic Protocol bullets.
10.2	The three sets of [action] items cover the three most important actionable implementation aspects from the ER Protocol section	🟢	The standard gastroenterology regimen, the peppermint-caraway combination and the topical headache solution are the ER’s three dose-specified protocols.
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 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 spans carry ER-derived content; doses, frequencies and timing match the ER bullets exactly.

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	🟢	Irritable bowel syndrome, functional dyspepsia and tension-type headache are the only indications for which the ER states a time course.
11.2	The sets are picked and ordered by the magnitude of the related benefit	🟢	The two High-tier benefits precede the Medium-tier headache 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.	N/A	Three distinct time-to-effect aspects exist 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.	🟢	“2–4 weeks” from the ER’s two-to-four-week trial advice, “4 weeks” from the dyspepsia magnitude line, “15 minutes” from the headache magnitude line.
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.

12. Benefits

#	Description	Result	Comments
12.1	The section is derived from the ER Expected Benefits section	🟢	All ten items are the ER’s benefit headings.
12.2	Key variables are [benefits_high], [benefits_medium], [benefits_low], [benefits_speculative]	🟢	All four spans present and populated at lines 540-564.
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 item is a bare outcome phrase; no RRs, NNTs, SMDs or mechanisms 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 benefit item.
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 have items in the ER.

13. Risks

#	Description	Result	Comments
13.1	The section is derived from the ER Potential Risks & Side Effects section	🟢	All eight items are the ER’s risk headings.
13.2	Key variables are [risks_high], [risks_medium], [risks_low], [risks_speculative]	🟢	All four spans present and populated at lines 607-625.
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.	🟢	The ER’s magnitude lines (RR 1.57, 84% iron reduction, 200 mg/kg/day threshold) are all omitted.
13.4	Parenthetical content — including frequencies, severity grades, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved.	🟢	No parentheses appear in any risk item.
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 have items in the ER.

14. Monitoring

#	Description	Result	Comments
14.1	The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section	🟢	All five rows come from the ER Monitoring Protocol & Defining Success table.
14.2	All measurable/quantifiable biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed	🟢	IBS-SSS score, reflux symptom score, ALT, ferritin and resting blood pressure — all five ER table rows, with targets and rationales preserved.
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.	🟢	“Reassessment at 2, 4 and 12 weeks; laboratory work every 6–12 months, or sooner with daily peppermint tea” matches the ER’s closing cadence sentence.

15. Qualitative Assessment

#	Description	Result	Comments
15.1	The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section	🟢	All six items come from the ER’s “Qualitative markers worth tracking alongside the numbers” list.
15.2	All subjective/qualitative biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed	🟢	All six ER qualitative markers are present and carried verbatim.

Issues 20/08/2026 17:41

Pass rate 100.00%. No issues found.

Issues 20/08/2026 17:35

1. 10.1 — Protocol sub drawn from Risk Mitigation: action_1_sub (line 457) takes “swallowed whole” and “30–90 minutes before meals” from the ER Risk Mitigation Strategies section rather than from Therapeutic Protocol, which is the section item 10.1 restricts the Protocol panel to.

Fixes 20/08/2026 17:35

1. 10.1 — Protocol sub resourced to ER Protocol: action_1_sub changed from “Enteric-coated, swallowed whole, 30–90 minutes before meals; four-to-twelve-week course” to “Enteric-coated, taken before breakfast, lunch and the evening meal; four-to-twelve-week course”, so every element now derives from the ER Therapeutic Protocol section rather than from Risk Mitigation Strategies.

Issues 20/08/2026 17:29

1. 7.1 — At-A-Glance omits evidence conflict: Lines 434–437 condense only the first and third paragraphs of the ER Conclusion; the second paragraph’s central finding that the trials “designed to modern regulatory standards did not separate it from a dummy treatment” (ER line 478) is dropped despite 18 words of the 60-word budget remaining unused.

Fixes 20/08/2026 17:29

1. 7.1 — At-A-Glance omits evidence conflict: Added the ER Conclusion’s second-paragraph point to at_a_glance, changing “…irritable bowel syndrome and indigestion; nausea…” to “…irritable bowel syndrome and indigestion, though the most carefully designed recent trials matched a dummy treatment; nausea…”. The summary now runs 53 words, still inside the 60-word cap and free of trial names and effect sizes.

Issues 20/08/2026 17:22

1. 1.2 — ER hedges dropped in Monitoring: Three Monitoring “Why” cells drop cautious ER phrasing — line 672 states “the hepatic effect of pulegone” where the ER says “the hepatic effect attributed to pulegone”; line 694 drops the ER’s “reported in one trial” from “Tracks the modest hypotensive signal”; line 683 drops the ER’s “habitual” from “iron depletion from habitual peppermint tea”.

Fixes 20/08/2026 17:22

1. 1.2 — ER hedges restored in Monitoring: Restored the ER’s cautious phrasing in the three Monitoring “Why” cells — “hepatic effect of pulegone” to “hepatic effect attributed to pulegone”, “iron depletion from peppermint tea” to “iron depletion from habitual peppermint tea”, and “Tracks the modest hypotensive signal” to “Tracks the modest hypotensive signal reported in one trial”.

Issues 20/08/2026 17:15

1. 9.4 — Added severity annotation on ciclosporin: Line 589 renders the item as “Ciclosporin specifically (absolute caution)”; the parenthetical is not a parenthetical in the ER bullet (ER line 318: “Ciclosporin specifically: Absolute caution.”) and no other caution item carries its ER severity marker, so it is an elaboration beyond the key fact.

Fixes 20/08/2026 17:15

1. 9.4 — Ciclosporin severity annotation removed: Changed the Key Interactions item from “Ciclosporin specifically (absolute caution)” to “Ciclosporin specifically”, stripping the added parenthetical that was not a parenthetical in the ER bullet.

Issues 20/08/2026 17:06

1. 4.5 — Sheet exceeds one A4 page: Several fields carry near-verbatim ER sentences instead of condensed content — time_1_sub (lines 502–506, 158 characters lifted from the ER “Time to effect” bullet), action_1_sub (lines 455–458, 136 characters), the seven-item caution_items gate with full drug lists (lines 590–604), and Monitoring target/why cells that each wrap to two lines (lines 649–713) — so the rendered sheet runs past the one-page budget.

Fixes 20/08/2026 17:06

1. 4.5 — Time-to-effect subs condensed: time_1_sub cut from the near-verbatim 158-character ER sentence to “Primary endpoints measured at four weeks; some relief within days”; time_2_sub shortened to “Global dyspepsia symptoms assessed at four weeks” and time_3_sub to “Intensity falls from 15 minutes after application”.
2. 4.5 — Protocol subs condensed: action_1_sub reduced from 136 characters to “Enteric-coated, swallowed whole, 30–90 minutes before meals; four-to-twelve-week course”, and action_3_sub to “Applied to forehead and temples at onset, repeated at 15 and 30 minutes”.
3. 4.5 — At-A-Glance tightened: Reduced from 54 to 42 words by collapsing the medium-tier benefit list into “nausea, headache and feeling cooler in heat rest on weaker evidence”, keeping the ER Conclusion’s mechanism, benefit hierarchy and heartburn statement.
4. 4.5 — Decision gates trimmed: Contraindication items shortened (e.g. “Documented IgE-mediated allergy to peppermint, menthol or other Lamiaceae plants” → “IgE-mediated allergy to peppermint, menthol or other Lamiaceae”) and interaction drug lists reduced to representative named examples, cutting the caution gate from ~13 to ~8 wrapped lines while preserving every ER item and its qualifier.
5. 4.5 — Monitoring cells shortened: Each target/why cell trimmed to a single wrapped line (e.g. “Tracks the modest hypotensive signal reported in one trial” → “Tracks the modest hypotensive signal”), and monitoring_cadence condensed to “Reassessment at 2, 4 and 12 weeks; laboratory work every 6–12 months, or sooner with daily peppermint tea”.