Audit: QRS - Resistant Starch for Health & Longevity

Audit conducted on 15/08/2026 05:48 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. 🟢 Spot-checked every populated span against the ER: doses (20–40 g/day, >28 g/day), thresholds (CDAI >220, IBS-SSS >300, ≥20 ppm/90 min), biomarker ranges and cadence all trace to ER lines 355–362, 386–406, 443, 469–493.
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. 🟢 Cautious ER wording carried over verbatim where used, e.g. marker_9_target “No established target range; track the change from the individual’s own baseline instead” matches ER line 483.
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”). 🟢 No strengthening or softening found; action_2_value “Split dosing preferred” mirrors ER line 398 “Split dosing is preferred”, contraindication 6 keeps “unless supervised” from ER line 362.
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 map 1:1 to the ER “Populations who should avoid Resistant Starch” list (ER 355–362); Key Interactions map 1:1 to the ER interaction bullets (ER 335–353). No Benefit- or Risk-Modifying Factor is surfaced as 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, study names, author names, NCT identifiers or brand names appear anywhere in the QRS.
1.6 The QRS does not introduce new attributions. 🟢 No attributions of any kind are introduced.

2. Focus, Tone & Audience

# Description Result Comments
2.1 The QRS follows the tone of the ER, which is determined by the ER’s own language, phrasing, and framing. 🟢 Matches the ER’s measured, sceptical register, including the ER Conclusion’s own “several well-run studies found nothing”.
2.2 The tone of the QRS is simultaneously expert, accessible, objective, and data-driven, but also empowering and encouraging 🟢 Objective and data-driven throughout, closing on an actionable self-trial framing rather than a verdict.
2.3 The QRS reads as a trusted, knowledgeable guide rather than a prescriptive doctor 🟢 Presents thresholds and ranges as evidence; no directives issued in the document’s own voice.
2.4 The QRS avoids language that implies medical or clinical advice 🟢 No prescriptive or clinical-advice phrasing; gate labels are the fixed template headings.
2.5 The QRS “presents information” instead of “providing guidance”, “recommending”, or “advising” 🟢 Content is stated declaratively (“Split dosing preferred”, “Baseline panel before the first dose”); no recommending or advising verbs.
2.6 The QRS never addresses “the reader” directly — it presents evidence, not guidance 🟢 No second-person address anywhere in the populated spans.
2.7 The QRS is written in plain language, avoiding unnecessary medical jargon 🟢 Plain language used wherever the ER allows; retained technical terms (insulin secretagogues, alpha-glucosidase inhibitors) are decision-relevant and taken from the ER.
2.8 Information is presented in a concise and very compact manner 🟢 Every tier collapsed to a single semicolon-separated line; gate items trimmed to the key fact.
2.9 It DOES NOT address the reader directly 🟢 Confirmed: no “you”/”your” in any populated span.
2.10 The target audience is health- and longevity-oriented adults who are risk-aware, proactive, and actively seeking to optimize health or apply the intervention under review. 🟢 Framing assumes a self-monitoring adult running biomarker panels and a titration log.
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. 🟢 Presents a 12-week trial with baseline and follow-up bloodwork plus daily symptom scoring — effortful protocol content retained.
2.12 The document is NOT written for the general population, who are unwilling to employ lifestyle and behavioral changes or follow protocols that may be inconvenient, costly, or require effort. 🟢 Not pitched at the general population; assumes willingness to titrate, log symptoms and repeat panels.
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. 🟢 Risk/benefit weighting matches the ER: digestive effects foregrounded as the reliable outcome, metabolic effects presented as real but small.
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. 🟢 “anti-aging” does not appear; the header uses the ER canonical topic “Resistant Starch for 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. 🟢 Clinical register maintained in the document’s own voice; the plainer wording in At-A-Glance is required by item 7.4 and mirrors the ER Conclusion.

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 headings present and unmodified: Protocol, Time to effect, Benefits, Risk & Side Effects, Monitoring, Qualitative Assessment, Contraindications, Key Interactions, High/Medium/Low/Speculative, Marker/Target/Why.
3.2 All “…” from the [qrs_template] are present in the the QRS. 🟢 Diff against the template confirms every data-qrs-var span is present, with marker_#* expanded to marker_1..10 and qualitative_item# expanded to 1..6.
3.3 Spans that are not addressed in a checklist item are left unchanged 🟢 Full file diff against the template shows changes confined to metadata values and variable spans; CSS, comments, footer disclaimer and the website=”…” spans 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 relied on by the QRS is empty, so no empty-state phrasing is required.
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 are the ER bold labels verbatim: “Standard supplemental dose”, “Single versus split dosing”, “Best time of day” (ER 386, 394, 398).
4.3 Labels are not paraphrased, abbreviated, or invented. 🟢 Time-to-effect labels are lifted from ER wording (“Bowel changes”, “Glycemic and lipid effects”, ER 443) rather than invented; no label is paraphrased or abbreviated.
4.4 The QRS DOES NOT use emoji indicators (no 🟩, 🟥, 🟨, etc.). Color and emphasis are conveyed through CSS and bold labels. 🟢 No 🟩/🟥/🟨 or any other emoji indicator appears in the QRS; tiers are carried by bold labels and CSS.
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. 🟢 Each section is condensed to the per-section budget — four one-to-three-line tier rows, six contraindications, ten interaction items, ten table rows — rather than extended; no content spills past the sheet container.

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. 🟢 The metadata comment is the first element after <!doctype html> (lines 2–14), before the template comment, head and body.
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. 🟢 YAML opens at line 3 and closes at line 13; the preceding “QRS — Metadata” text sits outside the delimiters.
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, so it never renders; no other element repeats it.
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. 🟢 All values trimmed; only duration: “00:04” is quoted, which YAML requires because the value contains a colon.
5.5 The filename of the source ER is stated as “er_filename: [er_filename]” 🟢 er_filename: resistant_starch_2026-0815-0302_Opus_ER.md — matches the source ER on disk.
5.6 Version of the QRS.md file used to create the document is stated as “qrs_prompt_version: [Version of QRS.md]” 🟢 qrs_prompt_version: 26.7.02 matches the version badge at the top 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) 🟢 qrs_creation_date: 2026-0815-0542 is well-formed YYYY-MMDD-HHMM.
5.8 The nickname of the AI used to create the document is stated as “qrs_creator_ai_nickname: [qrs_creator_ai_nickname]” 🟢 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) 🟢 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]” 🟢 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) 🟢 Nickname plus version number only, no additional qualifier.
5.12 The filename of the document is stated as “qrs_filename: [filename of this document]” 🟢 qrs_filename: resistant_starch_2026-0815-0302_Opus_QRS.html — matches the actual filename.
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: no stray whitespace and no unnecessary quoting on any frontmatter value.

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., &amp; for &) 🟢 Resistant Starch for Health & Longevity - Quick Reference Sheet — canonical_topic from ER line 8 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., &amp; for &) 🟢 header_topic is “Resistant Starch for Health & Longevity”, entity-encoded.
6.3 [header_subline_date] is set to [qrs_creation_date reformatted as MM/DD/YYYY] 🟢 header_subline_date 08/15/2026 is the MM/DD/YYYY form of qrs_creation_date 2026-0815-0542.
6.4 [header_subline_model] is set to [qrs_creator_ai_fullname] 🟢 header_subline_model is “Opus 5”, matching 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. 🟢 Header carries only title, date, ER link, AI4L link and model; no badge, version stamp, AKA line or audit date.

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 (ER 517–521) into mechanism, the reliable effect, the weak effects, cost/downside, and the test to run.
7.2 [at_a_glance] is no longer than 60 words 🟢 59 words, within the 60-word limit.
7.3 Every fact in [at_a_glance] is supported by a distinct passage in the ER. 🟢 Each clause traces to a distinct Conclusion passage: undigested starch fermented by gut bacteria; digestive effects reproduce most consistently; metabolic effects real but small with null trials; trivial cost and weeks of gas; a careful 12-week self-trial with before-and-after bloodwork.
7.4 It DOES NOT use acronyms or technical classifications that require specialist knowledge, uses plain-language terms instead 🟢 No acronyms or technical classifications; uses “blood sugar”, “the fuel colon cells prefer”, “bloodwork” instead of glucose/butyrate/laboratory panel.
7.5 It DOES NOT cite specific trials (names, years, sample sizes, p-values) 🟢 No trial names, years, sample sizes or p-values.
7.6 It DOES NOT cite effect sizes, relative risks, or statistical results 🟢 No effect sizes, confidence intervals, hazard ratios or other statistics.

8. Contraindications

# Description Result Comments
8.1 The section is derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section 🟢 Derived from the “Populations who should avoid Resistant Starch” list inside the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section (ER 355–362).
8.2 [stop_items] represent the Contraindications from the ER 🟢 All six ER avoid-populations are represented, in ER order.
8.3 Individual [stop_items] are formatted as <li></li> 🟢 Each item is its own <li> 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. 🟢 Trailing rationale stripped, e.g. ER “unless the intake is supervised, since food sources are potassium- and phosphate-rich” reduced to “unless supervised”; no dash-trailing clauses remain.
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). 🟢 Thresholds and windows preserved: Mayo endoscopic subscore ≥2, CDAI >220, ≥20 ppm hydrogen rise within 90 minutes, IBS-SSS >300, within 90 days.
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 “>” only as a numeric threshold against a named scale (CDAI >220, IBS-SSS >300), not as ranking notation needing an explanatory phrase, so no normalisation applies.
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 is populated, and the ER does identify populations that should avoid the intervention, so the empty-state condition correctly does not apply.
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, so no empty-state HTML comment is required.

9. Key Interactions

# Description Result Comments
9.1 The section is derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section 🟢 Derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications bullets (ER 335–353).
9.2 [caution_items] represent the Key Interactions from the ER, excluding any that are already listed as Contraindications 🟢 All ten ER interaction bullets are present and none duplicates a contraindication.
9.3 Individual [caution_items] are formatted as <li></li> 🟢 Each item is its own <li> 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. 🟢 Caution/Monitor classifications and mitigation sentences stripped; no dash-trailing clauses remain.
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 example drug lists preserved in full: glipizide/glyburide/repaglinide; acarbose/miglitol; levothyroxine/digoxin/warfarin/lithium; amoxicillin/ciprofloxacin/metronidazole/fluconazole.
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 interaction bullets contain no ranking notation inside parentheses; parenthetical content is example drug lists only.
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 is populated, and the ER does identify interactions that change how the intervention is used, so the empty-state condition correctly does not apply.
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, so no empty-state HTML comment is required.

10. Protocol

# Description Result Comments
10.1 The section is derived from the ER Protocol section 🟢 All three action cells come from the ER Therapeutic Protocol section (ER 386, 394, 398).
10.2 The three sets of [action] items cover the three most important actionable implementation aspects from the ER Protocol section 🟢 Dose, dose splitting and timing are the three most actionable implementation aspects in 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 The ER Protocol section contains twelve actionable bullets, well above three, so no action set is unused.
10.4 All used [action_#label], [action#value], [action#_sub] items are filled with meaningful content derived from the ER Protocol section. 🟢 All nine action_#_label/value/sub spans carry substantive ER-derived content.

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 🟢 Covers the three time-to-effect aspects the ER states (ER 443): glycemic beyond eight weeks, bowel changes days to two weeks, lipid beyond four weeks.
11.2 The sets are picked and ordered by the magnitude of the related benefit 🟢 Ordered glycemic, bowel, lipid — matching the ER benefit tiers (both glycemic and bowel are High with glycemic listed first at ER 155/161; lipid is Medium at ER 169).
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 three distinct time-to-effect aspects, so no time set is unused.
11.4 All used [time_#label], [time#value], [time#_sub] items are filled with meaningful content derived from the ER. 🟢 All nine time_#_label/value/sub spans carry substantive ER-derived content.
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 443), so the section is correctly retained.

12. Benefits

# Description Result Comments
12.1 The section is derived from the ER Expected Benefits section 🟢 All four tiers mirror the ER Expected Benefits headings and their High/Medium/Low/Speculative grading (ER 153–227).
12.2 Key variables are [benefits_high], [benefits_medium], [benefits_low], [benefits_speculative] 🟢 benefits_high, benefits_medium, benefits_low and benefits_speculative are all present and populated.
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 tier is a semicolon-separated list of bare benefit headings; no magnitudes, mechanisms, citations or study details carried over.
12.4 Parenthetical content — including effect sizes, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved. 🟢 No parenthetical content survives — the ER’s “⚠️ Conflicted” flags, effect sizes and confidence intervals are all stripped.
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 benefit tiers contain items in the ER, so no span needs to be hidden.

13. Risks

# Description Result Comments
13.1 The section is derived from the ER Potential Risks & Side Effects section 🟢 All four tiers mirror the ER Potential Risks & Side Effects headings and grading (ER 251–313).
13.2 Key variables are [risks_high], [risks_medium], [risks_low], [risks_speculative] 🟢 risks_high, risks_medium, risks_low and risks_speculative are all present and populated.
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. 🟢 Each tier is a semicolon-separated list of bare risk headings; no frequencies, mechanisms or trial details carried over.
13.4 Parenthetical content — including frequencies, severity grades, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved. 🟢 No parenthetical content survives; severity flags and magnitudes are stripped.
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 risk tiers contain items in the ER, so no span needs to be hidden.

14. Monitoring

# Description Result Comments
14.1 The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section 🟢 Derived from the ER Monitoring Protocol & Defining Success section (ER 467–484).
14.2 All measurable/quantifiable biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed 🟢 All ten biomarkers from the ER table are listed in ER order, with targets and rationales matching ER 475–484.
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. 🟢 monitoring_cadence reproduces the ER cadence from ER 469–471: baseline before first dose, metabolic panel at 12 weeks, then every 6 to 12 months; stool and symptom records weekly through the first month, then monthly.

15. Qualitative Assessment

# Description Result Comments
15.1 The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section 🟢 Derived from the qualitative marker list in the ER Monitoring Protocol & Defining Success section (ER 486–493).
15.2 All subjective/qualitative biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed 🟢 All six ER qualitative markers are listed verbatim and in ER order.

Issues 15/08/2026 05:48

Pass rate 100.00%. No issues found.