Audit: QRS - PQQ for Health & Longevity

Audit conducted on 21/08/2026 15:21 using AI4L / Opus 5

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.	🟢	Spot-checked every populated span. Protocol values trace to ER lines 293/297/301; time-to-effect values to ER line 343; all nine monitoring rows to the ER table (ER 373–381); cadence to ER 369; qualitative items verbatim from ER 385–389; benefit/risk items are the ER’s own H4 headings.
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.	🟢	Hedges carried across: “no trial support of its own” (action_1_sub), “No trial randomized timing” (action_2_sub), “no PQQ-specific target exists — track change from the individual’s own baseline” (marker_8_target), “mostly manufacturer-funded” and “No long-term human data” (at_a_glance).
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”).	🟢	All four avoid-populations from ER 272–275 sit in the Contraindications gate, not in Key Interactions; no downgrade. “Confined to people whose LDL cholesterol started at or above 140 mg/dL” (time_3_sub) uses the ER’s own word “confined” (ER 188).
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 and Key Interactions both come from ER `Key Interactions & Contraindications`; Benefits from `Expected Benefits`; Risks from `Potential Risks & Side Effects`. No Benefit-Modifying or Risk-Modifying Factor is promoted into a gate.
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, no NCT identifiers, no author names. The only brand name is “Life Extension” in action_3_sub, which the ER attaches to the same fact at line 297 (“Life Extension popularized pairing 20 mg PQQ with 100–200 mg coenzyme Q10 … Life Extension sells both”).
1.6	The QRS does not introduce new attributions.	🟢	No attribution appears that is not in the ER for the same statement.

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.	🟢	Matches the ER’s sceptical, evidence-weighting register — e.g. “The striking survival and tissue findings come from worms and mice” mirrors ER 349/413.
2.2	The tone of the QRS is simultaneously expert, accessible, objective, and data-driven, but also empowering and encouraging	🟢	Numeric anchors (20 mg/day, 76 hours, 140 mg/dL, 12 weeks) sit alongside plain-language framing; actionable protocol and monitoring content give the reader something to execute.
2.3	The QRS reads as a trusted, knowledgeable guide rather than a prescriptive doctor	🟢	Declarative throughout; no imperatives directed at a patient.
2.4	The QRS avoids language that implies medical or clinical advice	🟢	Monitoring cadence is stated impersonally (“Kidney markers and lipid panel repeated at 12 weeks”), not as an instruction; footer disclaimer intact.
2.5	The QRS “presents information” instead of “providing guidance”, “recommending”, or “advising”	🟢	No instance of “recommend”, “advise”, “should”, or “you should”.
2.6	The QRS never addresses “the reader” directly — it presents evidence, not guidance	🟢	Verified: zero occurrences of “you”, “your”, or “yours” in the file.
2.7	The QRS is written in plain language, avoiding unnecessary medical jargon	🟢	Technical terms are either standard lab names (eGFR, hs-CRP, ALT) required by the Monitoring table or plain-language substitutes (“energy producers” for mitochondria).
2.8	Information is presented in a concise and very compact manner	🟢	At-a-glance 54 words; gate items stripped to the key fact; benefit and risk tiers reduced to semicolon-separated headings.
2.9	It DOES NOT address the reader directly	🟢	Confirmed by the same second-person scan as 2.6.
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.	🟢	Functional-range monitoring targets (hs-CRP <0.5 mg/L, fasting glucose 75–85 mg/dL, ALT 10–26 U/L) are pitched well below conventional lab cut-offs, as this audience expects.
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.	🟢	A nine-marker baseline panel, 12-week re-testing and weekly qualitative tracking all assume a willing, effortful 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.	🟢	No simplified “just take one a day” framing; the sheet foregrounds evidence quality and sponsorship caveats.
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.	🟢	At-a-glance names the manufacturer-funding limitation and the animal-only origin of the striking results, which is the decision-relevant distinction 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.	🟢	Verified: no occurrence of “anti-aging” anywhere in the file. Title and header use “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.	🟢	Formal register throughout (“Kidney Tubule Injury at High Injected Doses”, “Pro-oxidant Redox Cycling at High Concentrations”, “Gastrointestinal Upset”). The lay phrasing in [at_a_glance] is mandated by item 7.4, which governs that span specifically.

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 present verbatim: “Protocol” (446), “Time to effect” (493), “Benefits” (543), “Risk & Side Effects” (605), “Monitoring” (627), “Qualitative Assessment” (767), “Contraindications” (568), “Key Interactions” (585), “Marker”/”Target”/”Why” (631–633). Tier labels “Medium”/”Low”/”Speculative” unmodified; “High” tiers are correctly hidden per 12.5/13.5.
3.2	All “<span data-qrs-var=”NAME”>…</span>” from the [qrs_template] are present in the the QRS.	🟢	66 `data-qrs-var` spans, each appearing exactly once, covering every variable named in this checklist: page_title, header_topic, header_subline_date, header_subline_model, at_a_glance, action_1–3 × label/value/sub, time_1–3 × label/value/sub, benefits_high/medium/low/speculative, stop_items, caution_items, risks_high/medium/low/speculative, marker_1–9 × name/target/why, monitoring_cadence, qualitative_item_1–5.
3.3	Spans that are not addressed in a checklist item are left unchanged	🟢	The non-variable template spans `website="evidence_review"` (423), `website="audit"` (426) and `website="full_review"` (440) are all intact and untouched, as is the fixed footer disclaimer (803–806).

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 is empty. The empty evidence tiers (Benefits High; Risks High and Medium) are governed by the more specific items 12.5 and 13.5, which require `display: none` rather than 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.	🟢	action_1_label “Standard dose”, action_2_label “Timing” and action_3_label “Combination approach” reproduce the ER’s bold labels at lines 293, 301 and 297 exactly.
4.3	Labels are not paraphrased, abbreviated, or invented.	🟢	Time labels “Cognitive changes”, “Inflammatory markers” and “Lipid changes” are the ER’s own sentence subjects at line 343. All nine marker names match the ER biomarker column verbatim.
4.4	The QRS DOES NOT use emoji indicators (no 🟩, 🟥, 🟨, etc.). Color and emphasis are conveyed through CSS and bold labels.	🟢	Verified: no 🟩/🟥/🟨 and no ⚠️ anywhere. The ER’s “⚠️ Conflicted” markers on “Memory, Attention & Processing Speed” and “Blunting of Training Adaptations” were correctly stripped.
4.5	The QRS is designed to render on one A4 page. Any section that has more content in the ER than fits the per-section budget is condensed by the LLM, not extended onto a second page.	🟢	Every section is condensed rather than transcribed: the ER’s eleven Protocol bullets reduce to three action cells, benefit and risk tiers to single semicolon-joined lines, and gate items to bare facts with parentheticals only. No section is expanded beyond its template 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: the metadata comment opens immediately after `<!doctype html>` on line 1 and precedes the template comment on line 16 and `<html>` on line 17.
5.2	Inside that HTML comment the YAML block is delimited by a line “—” opening and a line “—” closing. Text before the opening “—” is permitted but is not parsed as YAML.	🟢	Opening `---` at line 3, closing `---` at line 13; the preamble text “QRS — Metadata (invisible, parsed by audit tooling)” sits before the opening delimiter as permitted.
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; none of its values (prompt version, duration, git_user, git_issue) reappear in the rendered header, body or footer.
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 so because the value contains a colon. All other values are bare and untrimmed of nothing.
5.5	The filename of the source ER is stated as “er_filename: [er_filename]”	🟢	Line 4: `er_filename: pqq_2026-0821-1308_Opus_ER.md`, matching the ER’s own `filename` frontmatter field.
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: 2026-0821-1516` — correct YYYY-MMDD-HHMM form.
5.8	The nickname of the AI used to create the document is stated as “qrs_creator_ai_nickname: [qrs_creator_ai_nickname]”	🟢	Line 7: `qrs_creator_ai_nickname: Opus`.
5.9	The nickname of the AI is just a single word model name without version, etc. (e.g., Opus, Sonnet, Grok, Gemini, ChatGPT)	🟢	“Opus” — single word, 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” = nickname plus version number, no qualifier such as a context-window tag.
5.12	The filename of the document is stated as “qrs_filename: [filename of this document]”	🟢	Line 9: `qrs_filename: pqq_2026-0821-1308_Opus_QRS.html`, matching the file’s actual name on disk.
5.13	All frontmatter values are trimmed: no leading or trailing whitespace, no surrounding quotes unless the value contains a colon, bracket, or leading special character that requires YAML quoting.	🟢	Re-verified across all nine keys; only the colon-bearing `duration` value is quoted.

#	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: “PQQ for Health & Longevity - Quick Reference Sheet”, matching ER `canonical_topic: PQQ for Health & Longevity` with the ampersand entity-encoded.
6.2	[header_topic] is set to the [canonical_topic] of the ER `frontmatter`, with HTML entities encoded as needed (e.g., `&` for `&`)	🟢	Line 417: “PQQ for Health & Longevity”.
6.3	[header_subline_date] is set to [qrs_creation_date reformatted as MM/DD/YYYY]	🟢	Line 421: “08/21/2026”, the correct MM/DD/YYYY rendering of `qrs_creation_date: 2026-0821-1516`.
6.4	[header_subline_model] is set to [qrs_creator_ai_fullname]	🟢	Line 425: “Opus 5”, matching the `qrs_creator_ai_fullname` frontmatter value.
6.5	No additional header content appears: no badge, version stamp, AKA / alternate names line, source-AI attribution, audit date, or QRS variant marker.	🟢	The header carries only title, creation date, the template’s evidence-review link and the AI4L / model attribution. The ER’s `alternate_names` list (Pyrroloquinoline Quinone, Methoxatin, BioPQQ, mnemoPQQ, MGCPQQ) is correctly absent.

7. At-A-Glance Section

#	Description	Result	Comments
7.1	[at_a_glance] is dense, execution-oriented summary of the ER `Conclusion` section	🟢	All five clauses map onto the ER Conclusion (ER 411–417): bacterial origin and trace food levels, the mitochondrial mechanism, the small sponsored human trials, the animal provenance of the striking findings, and the absence of long-term data.
7.2	[at_a_glance] is no longer than 60 words	🟢	54 words.
7.3	Every fact in [at_a_glance] is supported by a distinct passage in the ER.	🟢	“sold in far larger amounts” ← ER 411; “switches on the machinery that builds and protects” ← ER 411; “mostly manufacturer-funded” ← ER 413; “worms and mice” ← ER 413; “No long-term human data” ← ER 417.
7.4	It DOES NOT use acronyms or technical classifications that require specialist knowledge, uses plain-language terms instead	🟢	“the cell’s energy producers” replaces mitochondria; no acronyms, no evidence-tier labels, no pharmacological classifications.
7.5	It DOES NOT cite specific trials (names, years, sample sizes, p-values)	🟢	No author name, year, n, or p-value; trials are referred to only collectively as “Small, mostly manufacturer-funded trials”.
7.6	It DOES NOT cite effect sizes, relative risks, or statistical results	🟢	Direction only (“better memory, lower inflammation and modestly lower cholesterol”); no numeric magnitude.

8. Contraindications

#	Description	Result	Comments
8.1	The section is derived from the ER `Key Interactions & Contraindications` section	🟢	All four items come from the “Populations who should avoid PQQ” list at ER 270–275, inside that section.
8.2	[stop_items] represent the Contraindications from the ER	🟢	All four ER avoid-populations are present and none is invented: pregnancy/breastfeeding, diminished ovarian reserve while pursuing conception, CKD stage 4+, and under-18s.
8.3	Individual [stop_items] are formatted as <li></li>	🟢	Lines 571–580: four discrete `<li>` elements inside the `stop_items` span.
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 em-dash rationale is stripped — “— no human safety data at supplemental doses”, “— the only human signal of harm falls in exactly this group”, “— sole elimination route is renal…”, “— no trial has enrolled anyone below 20 years of age” all removed. No dashes remain in any item.
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).	🟢	Both decision-relevant parentheticals survive verbatim: “(anti-Müllerian hormone below 1.0 ng/mL)” and “(estimated filtration rate below 30 mL/min/1.73 m²)”, along with the staging qualifier “at stage 4 or worse” and the age threshold “under 18”.
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 the contraindication parentheticals; both thresholds are written out in words (“below 1.0 ng/mL”, “below 30 mL/min/1.73 m²”).
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.	N/A	The section is not empty — the ER names four such populations and all four are carried over.
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. <!– empty: ER names no population that should avoid the intervention –>	N/A	The section is not empty, so no absence comment is required.

9. Key Interactions

#	Description	Result	Comments
9.1	The section is derived from the ER `Key Interactions & Contraindications` section	🟢	All five items come from the interaction bullets at ER 256–264.
9.2	[caution_items] represent the Key Interactions from the ER, excluding any that are already listed as Contraindications	🟢	The five substantive interactions are carried; the ER’s two explicit non-interactions (over-the-counter medications, other interventions — ER 266, 268) are correctly omitted, and no contraindication is duplicated here.
9.3	Individual [caution_items] are formatted as <li></li>	🟢	Lines 588–595: five discrete `<li>` elements inside the `caution_items` span.
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 trailing clauses stripped (“— caution, likely additive”, “— monitor, potentiating”, “— monitor, complementary”, “— caution, additive”, “— caution, theoretical”), together with the Devasani and Ulpathakumbura citations and the mechanistic rationale.
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 example-drug list is retained: “(atorvastatin, rosuvastatin, simvastatin)”, “(nicotinamide mononucleotide, nicotinamide riboside)”, “(red yeast rice, plant sterols, berberine)”, “(high-dose vitamin C, alpha-lipoic acid, N-acetylcysteine)”. The statin gloss “— cholesterol-lowering drugs” inside the ER parenthesis is correctly dropped as an explanation.
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 parentheticals are already plain comma-separated drug lists with no ranking symbols.
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.	N/A	The section is not empty — the ER identifies five interactions and all five are carried over.
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. <!– empty: ER names no interaction that changes how the intervention is used –>	N/A	The section is not empty, so no absence comment is required.

10. Protocol

#	Description	Result	Comments
10.1	The section is derived from the ER `Protocol` section	🟢	All three cells trace to ER `Therapeutic Protocol` bullets: “Standard dose” (ER 293), “Timing” (ER 301) and “Combination approach” (ER 297).
10.2	The three sets of [action] items cover the three most important actionable implementation aspects from the ER `Protocol` section	🟢	Dose, timing and the dominant real-world stack are the three decisions a reader actually has to make. The remaining ER bullets are either null findings (genetic polymorphisms, sex-based differences, dose splitting) or restatements of dose and response modifiers.
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 well over three actionable aspects and all three action sets are populated, so no set needed hiding.
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 populated: “Standard dose / 20 mg/day”, “Timing / Morning, with food”, “Combination approach / 20 mg with 100–200 mg coenzyme Q10”, each with a sub drawn near-verbatim from ER 293, 301 and 297 respectively.

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	🟢	ER line 343 names exactly three: cognitive changes, inflammatory markers and lipid changes. All three are present.
11.2	The sets are picked and ordered by the magnitude of the related benefit	🟢	Cognitive changes first (the only Medium-tier benefit), then the two Low-tier benefits — reduced inflammatory markers, then lowered cholesterol — matching the ER’s own ordering within the Low 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 mentions three distinct time-to-effect aspects and all three sets are populated, so no set needed hiding.
11.4	All used [time_#label], [time#value], [time#_sub] items are filled with meaningful content derived from the ER.	🟢	“Cognitive changes / 8–12 weeks”, “Inflammatory markers / Within 76 hours”, “Lipid changes / 12 weeks”, with subs traceable to ER 343 (including “Nothing is detectable in days”), ER 140 (0.3 mg/kg/day crossover) and ER 188 (the 140 mg/dL baseline restriction).
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 (ER 343), so the section is correctly retained.

12. Benefits

#	Description	Result	Comments
12.1	The section is derived from the ER `Expected Benefits` section	🟢	Every listed item is an H4 heading from ER `Expected Benefits` (ER 130–180), with no additions.
12.2	Key variables are [benefits_high], [benefits_medium], [benefits_low], [benefits_speculative]	🟢	All four spans present at lines 545, 546, 549 and 555.
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.	🟢	Bare headings only. The ER’s “⚠️ Conflicted” marker, all Magnitude paragraphs, the 9.1 mg/dL LDL figure, sample sizes and manufacturer attributions are all excluded.
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; the ER’s inline glosses (e.g. “low-density lipoprotein, the fraction that drives arterial plaque”) are absent.
12.5	If no items of a specific sub-section (high, medium, low, speculative) are present the respective <SPAN> is set to “display=none”, not filled with “None documented in human trials to date” or similar empty-state phrasing.	🟢	ER line 126 states no benefit reaches the High tier; `benefits_high` is correspondingly empty with `style="display: none"` (line 545) and carries no empty-state text.

13. Risks

#	Description	Result	Comments
13.1	The section is derived from the ER `Potential Risks & Side Effects` section	🟢	All six items are H4 headings from ER 210–240, with no additions.
13.2	Key variables are [risks_high], [risks_medium], [risks_low], [risks_speculative]	🟢	All four spans present at lines 607, 608, 609 and 616.
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.	🟢	Bare headings only. The ER’s Magnitude data (1.066 → 0.852 ng/mL, p = 0.033, 11.5 mg/kg, 2,000 mg/kg), the Watanabe/Nakano/Peng citations and the “⚠️ Conflicted” marker on Blunting of Training Adaptations are all excluded.
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; the ER’s inline glosses (e.g. “a blood measure of remaining egg supply”) are absent.
13.5	If no items of a specific sub-section (high, medium, low, speculative) are present the respective <SPAN> is set to “display=none”, not filled with “None documented in human trials to date” or similar empty-state phrasing.	🟢	ER lines 202 and 206 state that no risk reaches the High or Medium tier; both `risks_high` (607) and `risks_medium` (608) are empty with `style="display: none"` and carry no empty-state text.

14. Monitoring

#	Description	Result	Comments
14.1	The section is derived from the ER `Monitoring` section	🟢	The table mirrors the ER `Monitoring Protocol & Defining Success` biomarker table (ER 371–381), reproducing its Biomarker, Optimal Functional Range and Why Measure It? columns.
14.2	All measurable/quantifiable biomarkers from the `Monitoring` section are listed	🟢	All nine ER biomarkers present in ER order: serum creatinine, eGFR, urinalysis, hs-CRP, LDL cholesterol, triglycerides, ALT, anti-Müllerian hormone, fasting glucose. Targets and rationales match verbatim, including the AMH note “no PQQ-specific target exists — track change from the individual’s own baseline”.
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.	🟢	Lines 757–761 carry a full cadence drawn from ER 369: baseline panel, kidney and lipid markers at 12 weeks then every 6–12 months, cognitive testing at 12 weeks, and AMH recheck at 3 months where measured at baseline.

15. Qualitative Assessment

#	Description	Result	Comments
15.1	The section is derived from the ER `Monitoring` section	🟢	All five items come from the “Qualitative markers, tracked weekly against a written baseline” list at ER 383–389.
15.2	All subjective/qualitative biomarkers from the `Monitoring` section are listed	🟢	All five present and verbatim: subjective forgetfulness, sustained attention during demanding cognitive work, time-to-fatigue in a repeatable aerobic session, sleep onset latency and night wakings, and morning energy on waking.

Issues 21/08/2026 15:21

Pass rate 100.00%. No issues found.