Audit: QRS - Sorbitol for Health & Longevity

Audit conducted on 21/08/2026 14:32 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. 🟢 Verified span by span against the ER: protocol cells vs ER lines 339/347/351, time cells vs line 394, benefits/risks vs the ER tier headings, gates vs lines 291-315, monitoring table vs lines 424-433, qualitative list vs lines 437-442.
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_8_target keeps the ER’s hedged wording verbatim (“No established consumer target; track change from the individual’s own baseline”).
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; contraindication qualifiers (“stage 4 or worse”, “positive sorbitol breath test”, “reduced bowel motility”) are carried across intact.
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. 🟢 Nothing from Benefit-Modifying Factors or Risk-Modifying Factors is surfaced as a gate; the polystyrene sulfonate item is placed under Contraindications because the ER labels it “Absolute contraindication” (ER line 291).
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, NCT identifiers, author names, or brand names appear anywhere in the QRS; only generic drug names that are present in the ER.
1.6 The QRS does not introduce new attributions. 🟢 No attributions of any kind in the QRS.

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, evidence-weighted register.
2.2 The tone of the QRS is simultaneously expert, accessible, objective, and data-driven, but also empowering and encouraging 🟢 Expert and data-driven; benefit tiers and monitoring targets give the reader actionable leverage.
2.3 The QRS reads as a trusted, knowledgeable guide rather than a prescriptive doctor 🟢 States what the evidence shows rather than issuing instructions.
2.4 The QRS avoids language that implies medical or clinical advice 🟢 Descriptive throughout; the footer disclaimer is the template’s.
2.5 The QRS “presents information” instead of “providing guidance”, “recommending”, or “advising” 🟢 Cells present the ER’s protocol as fact (“Split above 10 g daily”) rather than as advice.
2.6 The QRS never addresses “the reader” directly — it presents evidence, not guidance 🟢 No second-person pronouns anywhere in the document.
2.7 The QRS is written in plain language, avoiding unnecessary medical jargon 🟢 Plain language outside the biomarker names, which are the ER’s own terms.
2.8 Information is presented in a concise and very compact manner 🟢 Gate items, benefit and risk tiers are reduced to key facts; no ER prose is carried over.
2.9 It DOES NOT address the reader directly 🟢 Confirmed by search: no “you” / “your” in the file.
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. 🟢 Titration thresholds, breath testing and biomarker targets address a proactive, risk-aware reader.
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 breath testing, staged titration and repeat electrolyte panels without hedging on 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. 🟢 Assumes willingness to titrate, measure and monitor.
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. 🟢 Weighting mirrors the ER: reliable laxative and glycaemic benefit against a predictable 10-20 g tolerance ceiling.
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 occurrence of “anti-aging”; the header frames the sheet as “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 terminology in the document’s own voice (“osmotic diarrhea”, “co-administered oral medicines”, “malabsorption threshold”); the plainer At-A-Glance wording is the ER Conclusion text and is required by 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 fixed labels verified in source: lines 445, 491, 535, 562, 583, 605, 634, 638-640, 758, plus the four tier labels.
3.2 All “” from the [qrs_template] are present in the the QRS. 🟢 All 64 data-qrs-var spans present, in template order, from page_title through qualitative_item_6.
3.3 Spans that are not addressed in a checklist item are left unchanged 🟢 The three website=”…” spans (evidence_review, audit, full_review) and all template chrome 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 N/A — no source ER section drawn on by the QRS is empty; every populated span has ER content.
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’s bold labels verbatim (“Standard laxative protocol”, “Single versus split dosing”, “Best time of day”); all eight caution items reuse the ER bold labels verbatim.
4.3 Labels are not paraphrased, abbreviated, or invented. 🟢 No paraphrasing; the three time labels derive directly from the ER’s single “Time to effect” bullet, which names laxative, dental and microbiome effects.
4.4 The QRS DOES NOT use emoji indicators (no 🟩, 🟥, 🟨, etc.). Color and emphasis are conveyed through CSS and bold labels. 🟢 Search for 🟩/🟥/🟨/⚠️ returns zero hits; tiers are carried by bold text 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. 🟢 Content is condensed to labels and single-clause facts throughout; no section carries ER prose or spills a second sheet of content.

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 is the first element after <!doctype html>.
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; the preamble text on line 2 sits before the opening delimiter.
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 echoed by a rendered element.
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 is quoted, and it must be because it contains a colon.
5.5 The filename of the source ER is stated as “er_filename: [er_filename]” 🟢 er_filename: sorbitol_2026-0821-1233_Opus_ER.md (line 4).
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 (line 5), matching the QRS.md version badge.
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: 2026-0821-1425 (line 6), 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]” 🟢 qrs_creator_ai_nickname: Opus (line 7).
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]” 🟢 qrs_creator_ai_fullname: Opus 5 (line 8).
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 number, no qualifier.
5.12 The filename of the document is stated as “qrs_filename: [filename of this document]” 🟢 qrs_filename: sorbitol_2026-0821-1233_Opus_QRS.html (line 9), matching the file on disk.
5.13 All frontmatter values are trimmed: no leading or trailing whitespace, no surrounding quotes unless the value contains a colon, bracket, or leading special character that requires YAML quoting. 🟢 Re-verified: no stray whitespace or unnecessary quoting in any of the nine values.

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 &) 🟢 Line 22: “Sorbitol for Health & Longevity - Quick Reference Sheet”, 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 &) 🟢 Line 417: “Sorbitol for Health & Longevity”, matching canonical_topic.
6.3 [header_subline_date] is set to [qrs_creation_date reformatted as MM/DD/YYYY] 🟢 Line 421: 08/21/2026, the MM/DD/YYYY form of qrs_creation_date 2026-0821-1425.
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 carries only the title and the template subline; no badge, AKA line, version stamp, audit date, or variant marker.

7. At-A-Glance Section

# Description Result Comments
7.1 [at_a_glance] is dense, execution-oriented summary of the ER Conclusion section 🟢 Distilled from the ER Conclusion (lines 462-466): dual identity, laxation, glycaemic advantage, dental benefit, tolerance ceiling, drug-absorption cost.
7.2 [at_a_glance] is no longer than 60 words 🟢 57 words, verified by word count.
7.3 Every fact in [at_a_glance] is supported by a distinct passage in the ER. 🟢 Each clause maps to a distinct Conclusion passage: dual identity (line 462), stool/glucose/caries (line 462), the 10-20 g threshold (line 464), reduced drug absorption (line 464).
7.4 It DOES NOT use acronyms or technical classifications that require specialist knowledge, uses plain-language terms instead 🟢 No acronyms; uses “sweetener”, “table sugar”, “loose stool”, “swallowed medicines” rather than specialist terms.
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, relative risks, or statistics; “roughly 10 to 20 grams daily” is a dose threshold, not a statistical result.

8. Contraindications

# Description Result Comments
8.1 The section is derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section 🟢 Drawn from ER lines 289-315.
8.2 [stop_items] represent the Contraindications from the ER 🟢 The five “Populations who should avoid Sorbitol” bullets plus the ER’s one explicit “Absolute contraindication” (sodium/calcium polystyrene sulfonate, ER line 291).
8.3 Individual [stop_items] are formatted as <li></li> 🟢 Six <li> elements inside the [stop_items] span (lines 565-578).
8.4 Items are as concise as possible. No trailing explanations, no elaborations, no mechanistic rationale, no attributions, no citations, no study details. No content after an em-dash, en-dash, or hyphen-dash (e.g., “— dose reduction required”, “— reduced efficacy”) — these trailing clauses are stripped. Just the key fact. 🟢 Leading “Anyone with” is dropped and trailing rationale is stripped — e.g. the SORD item drops “who already carries a markedly elevated internal sorbitol load”; the ileus item drops the “(a stalled, paralysed bowel)” gloss.
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). 🟢 The decision-bearing qualifiers survive: “(both ALDOB gene copies faulty)”, “(both SORD gene copies faulty)”, “stage 4 or worse”, “with a positive sorbitol breath test”, “with reduced bowel motility”.
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 N/A — the ER’s Key Interactions & Contraindications bullets use no ranking notation inside parentheses.
8.7 The section is left empty ONLY IF the ER’s Key Interactions & Contraindications section identifies no population, condition, or scenario for which the intervention should be avoided, deferred, or used only under specialist supervision. 🟢 The section is populated, and correctly so — the ER names five populations that should avoid sorbitol plus one absolute contraindication.
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 N/A — the section is not empty; [stop_items] carries six contraindications.

9. Key Interactions

# Description Result Comments
9.1 The section is derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section 🟢 Drawn from ER lines 289-307.
9.2 [caution_items] represent the Key Interactions from the ER, excluding any that are already listed as Contraindications 🟢 All eight remaining ER interaction bullets are present; sodium/calcium polystyrene sulfonate is correctly omitted here because it sits in Contraindications.
9.3 Individual [caution_items] are formatted as <li></li> 🟢 Eight <li> elements inside the [caution_items] span (lines 586-595).
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. 🟢 Each item is the ER bold label alone; every mitigation and mechanism clause is stripped.
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 preserved verbatim: “(furosemide, hydrochlorothiazide)”, “(lactulose, polyethylene glycol 3350, magnesium hydroxide)”, “(inulin, fructooligosaccharides)”.
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 N/A — the ER’s Key Interactions & Contraindications bullets use no ranking notation inside parentheses.
9.7 The section is left empty ONLY IF the ER’s Key Interactions & Contraindications section identifies no interaction, additive effect, or exposure that changes how the intervention is used. 🟢 The section is populated, and correctly so — the ER names nine 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 N/A — the section is not empty; [caution_items] carries eight interactions.

10. Protocol

# Description Result Comments
10.1 The section is derived from the ER Protocol section 🟢 Drawn from the ER Therapeutic Protocol section (lines 337-361).
10.2 The three sets of [action] items cover the three most important actionable implementation aspects from the ER Protocol section 🟢 The dose regimen (line 339), split-dosing rule (line 351) and timing (line 347) are the three decision-bearing implementation aspects in that 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 N/A — the ER Therapeutic Protocol section supplies three or more distinct actionable aspects; 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 action fields carry substantive ER-derived content; no placeholders.

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 🟢 Laxative, dental and microbiome effects — the three named in the ER Practical Considerations time-to-effect bullet (line 394).
11.2 The sets are picked and ordered by the magnitude of the related benefit 🟢 Ordered High → Medium → Low by the tier of the associated benefit: laxation (High), dental caries (Medium), microbiome shift (Low).
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 N/A — the ER supplies three distinct time-to-effect aspects (laxative, dental, microbiome); 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. 🟢 All nine time fields carry substantive ER-derived content; the “moderate doses” qualifier on the microbiome cell tracks ER line 181.
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 N/A — the ER does provide time-to-effect information (Practical Considerations, ER line 394).

12. Benefits

# Description Result Comments
12.1 The section is derived from the ER Expected Benefits section 🟢 Drawn from the ER Expected Benefits section (lines 145-199).
12.2 Key variables are [benefits_high], [benefits_medium], [benefits_low], [benefits_speculative] 🟢 All four spans present (lines 537-555).
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. 🟢 Each tier lists ER benefit headings only, joined by semicolons; no magnitudes, mechanisms or citations.
12.4 Parenthetical content — including effect sizes, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved. 🟢 No parenthetical content anywhere in the four benefit spans.
12.5 If no items of a specific sub-section (high, medium, low, speculative) are present the respective is set to “display=none”, not filled with “None documented in human trials to date” or similar empty-state phrasing. N/A N/A — all four benefit tiers carry items in the ER Expected Benefits section.

13. Risks

# Description Result Comments
13.1 The section is derived from the ER Potential Risks & Side Effects section 🟢 Drawn from the ER Potential Risks & Side Effects section (lines 217-271).
13.2 Key variables are [risks_high], [risks_medium], [risks_low], [risks_speculative] 🟢 All four spans present (lines 607-628).
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 lists ER risk headings only; no magnitudes, percentages or study details.
13.4 Parenthetical content — including frequencies, severity grades, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved. 🟢 No parenthetical content anywhere in the four risk spans.
13.5 If no items of a specific sub-section (high, medium, low, speculative) are present the respective is set to “display=none”, not filled with “None documented in human trials to date” or similar empty-state phrasing. N/A N/A — all four risk tiers carry items in the ER Potential Risks & Side Effects section.

14. Monitoring

# Description Result Comments
14.1 The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section 🟢 Drawn from the ER Monitoring Protocol & Defining Success section (lines 418-433).
14.2 All measurable/quantifiable biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed 🟢 All eight ER biomarkers present with names, targets and rationales matching the ER table exactly (Bristol score, potassium, sodium, eGFR, fasting glucose, HbA1c, breath test, plasma sorbitol).
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. 🟢 Populated with the ER’s ongoing-monitoring paragraph condensed (ER line 422): weekly then monthly symptoms, electrolytes at four weeks then six to twelve monthly, HbA1c at three months.

15. Qualitative Assessment

# Description Result Comments
15.1 The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section 🟢 Drawn from the ER qualitative marker list (lines 435-442).
15.2 All subjective/qualitative biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed 🟢 All six ER qualitative markers present, verbatim.

Issues 21/08/2026 14:32

Pass rate 100.00%. No issues found.