Audit: QRS - CLA for Health & Longevity

Audit conducted on 21/06/2026 01:05 using AI4L / Opus 4.8

Iterations

Summary

Items Count
Total 91
Passed 85
Failed 0
N/A 6
Pass Rate 100.00%
  • Total = Passed + Failed + N/A
  • Pass Rate = Passed / (Passed + Failed) × 100
  • N/A items are excluded from the pass rate calculation

1. General Rules

# Description Result Comments
1.1 Every claim, magnitude, label, recommendation, and statement in the QRS is literally supported by content in the source ER. 🟢 All protocol values, monitoring targets, benefit/risk tiers, gates and qualitative items trace to ER content.
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. 🟢 “genuinely unresolved” / “concerns” mirror the ER’s hedged framing.
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”). 🟢 Contraindications and risks retain ER strength.
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. 🟢 Benefits, risks, contraindications and interactions map to the matching ER categories.
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. 🟢 Only Tonalin/Clarinol appear, both present in the ER Protocol/Sourcing sections.
1.6 The QRS does not introduce new attributions. 🟢 No new names or sources 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. 🟢 Measured, skeptical-but-balanced tone matches the ER.
2.2 The tone of the QRS is simultaneously expert, accessible, objective, and data-driven, but also empowering and encouraging 🟢 Expert yet accessible; objective framing.
2.3 The QRS reads as a trusted, knowledgeable guide rather than a prescriptive doctor 🟢 Presents evidence without prescribing.
2.4 The QRS avoids language that implies medical or clinical advice 🟢 Footer disclaimer; content presents information.
2.5 The QRS “presents information” instead of “providing guidance”, “recommending”, or “advising” 🟢 No “recommend”/”advise” verbs in body content.
2.6 The QRS never addresses “the reader” directly — it presents evidence, not guidance 🟢 No second-person address found.
2.7 The QRS is written in plain language, avoiding unnecessary medical jargon 🟢 Jargon limited; marker names are standard lab terms.
2.8 Information is presented in a concise and very compact manner 🟢 Dense cells and short list items throughout.
2.9 It DOES NOT address the reader directly 🟢 No “you”/”your” usage.
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 targets a proactive longevity-oriented adult.
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. 🟢 Protocol/monitoring detail assumes a committed 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. 🟢 Not pitched to passive general public.
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 notes the benefit is “often too minor to matter for an individual”.
2.14 The document’s own voice frames usage in longevity terms, not “anti-aging” (e.g., “anti-aging clinics”, “anti-aging community”, “anti-aging medicine”). Proper names that contain “anti-aging” (e.g., “American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine”) are quoted verbatim. 🟢 No “anti-aging” language present.
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 maintained (“gastrointestinal”, “insulin sensitivity”).

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 and tier labels are intact.
3.2 All “” from the [qrs_template] are present in the the QRS. 🟢 Full set of named variable spans present.
3.3 Spans that are not addressed in a checklist item are left unchanged 🟢 No unrelated spans altered.

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” 🟢 benefits_high (no High benefits in ER) is hidden via display:none rather than filled, consistent with no empty-state misuse.
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. 🟢 Tier labels and marker names used verbatim.
4.3 Labels are not paraphrased, abbreviated, or invented. 🟢 Marker/label text matches ER.
4.4 The QRS DOES NOT use emoji indicators (no 🟩, 🟥, 🟨, etc.). Color and emphasis are conveyed through CSS and bold labels. 🟢 No emoji indicators in the rendered content.
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. 🟢 ER content condensed into single-page cells/lists.

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. 🟢 Metadata comment immediately follows the doctype (lines 2–14).
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 delimited by — at lines 3 and 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.
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” is quoted (contains a colon); others unquoted.
5.5 The filename of the source ER is stated as “er_filename: [er_filename]” 🟢 er_filename: cla_2026-0621-0004_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: 26.5.18 (line 5).
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: 2026-0621-0004 (line 6).
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.
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 4.8 (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 4.8” = nickname + version, no qualifier.
5.12 The filename of the document is stated as “qrs_filename: [filename of this document]” 🟢 qrs_filename: cla_2026-0621-0004_Opus_QRS.html (line 9).
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. 🟢 Values trimmed; quoting limited to “duration”.

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 &) 🟢 “CLA for Health & Longevity - Quick Reference Sheet” (line 22).
6.2 [header_topic] is set to the [canonical_topic] of the ER frontmatter, with HTML entities encoded as needed (e.g., &amp; for &) 🟢 “CLA for Health & Longevity” (line 417).
6.3 [header_subline_date] is set to [qrs_creation_date reformatted as MM/DD/YYYY] 🟢 06/21/2026 (line 421) from 2026-0621.
6.4 [header_subline_model] is set to [qrs_creator_ai_fullname] 🟢 “Opus 4.8” (line 425).
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 title and standard subline.

7. At-A-Glance Section

# Description Result Comments
7.1 [at_a_glance] is dense, execution-oriented summary of the ER Conclusion section 🟢 Distills the Conclusion (lines 436–440).
7.2 [at_a_glance] is no longer than 60 words 🟢 52 words.
7.3 Every fact in [at_a_glance] is supported by a distinct passage in the ER. 🟢 Natural fat, modest fat loss clearer with exercise, often too small to matter, metabolic concerns, unresolved value — all in Conclusion.
7.4 It DOES NOT use acronyms or technical classifications that require specialist knowledge, uses plain-language terms instead 🟢 Plain-language; no specialist acronyms.
7.5 It DOES NOT cite specific trials (names, years, sample sizes, p-values) 🟢 No trial citations.
7.6 It DOES NOT cite effect sizes, relative risks, or statistical results 🟢 No effect sizes or statistics.

8. Contraindications

# Description Result Comments
8.1 The section is derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section 🟢 Maps to ER line 300 “Populations who should avoid CLA”.
8.2 [stop_items] represent the Contraindications from the ER 🟢 Four avoid-populations carried over.
8.3 Individual [stop_items] are formatted as <li></li> 🟢 Each item is a separate <li>.
8.4 Items are as concise as possible. No trailing explanations, no elaborations, no mechanistic rationale, no attributions, no citations, no study details. No content after an em-dash, en-dash, or hyphen-dash (e.g., “— dose reduction required”, “— reduced efficacy”) — these trailing clauses are stripped. Just the key fact. 🟢 Concise facts; no trailing dashed clauses.
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). 🟢 “above ~50 mg/dL” threshold preserved for lipoprotein(a).
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. 🟢 No bare ranking symbols carried through.
8.7 If no [stop_items] are present the section is left empty N/A Contraindications are present.

9. Key Interactions

# Description Result Comments
9.1 The section is derived from the ER Key Interactions & Contraindications section 🟢 Maps to ER interaction bullets (lines 288–298).
9.2 [caution_items] represent the Key Interactions from the ER, excluding any that are already listed as Contraindications 🟢 Six interaction classes, none duplicating the contraindications.
9.3 Individual [caution_items] are formatted as <li></li> 🟢 Each item a separate <li>.
9.4 Items are as concise as possible. No trailing explanations, no elaborations, no mechanistic rationale, no attributions, no citations, no study details. No content after an em-dash, en-dash, or hyphen-dash (e.g., “— dose reduction required”, “— reduced efficacy”) — these trailing clauses are stripped. Just the key fact. 🟢 Severity/mechanism/mitigation text stripped; only drug classes and examples 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). 🟢 Example drugs (metformin, warfarin, statins, etc.) preserved in parens.
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. 🟢 No bare ranking symbols present.
9.7 If no [caution_items] are present the section is left empty N/A Key interactions are present.

10. Protocol

# Description Result Comments
10.1 The section is derived from the ER Protocol section 🟢 Dose, isomer, timing from ER Therapeutic Protocol (lines 320–330).
10.2 The three sets of [action] items cover the three most important actionable implementation aspects from the ER Protocol section 🟢 Dose, Isomer, Timing are the key actionable choices.
10.3 If less that three distinct actionable implementation aspects are mentioned in the ER the unused sets are left empty and made invisible, not filled with placeholder text or empty-state phrasing. N/A Three actionable aspects are present.
10.4 All used [action_#label], [action#value], [action#_sub] items are filled with meaningful content derived from the ER Protocol section. 🟢 Each cell carries ER-supported detail (3.0–3.4 g/day; 50:50 mix; split with meals).

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 🟢 Body fat 8–12 weeks; with-exercise >4 weeks; overall months-not-days.
11.2 The sets are picked and ordered by the magnitude of the related benefit 🟢 Body fat (Medium benefit) leads, then exercise-combined (Low), then horizon.
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 time-to-effect aspects are present.
11.4 All used [time_#label], [time#value], [time#_sub] items are filled with meaningful content derived from the ER. 🟢 Values trace to ER lines 208, 371.
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 Time-to-effect information is present in the ER.

12. Benefits

# Description Result Comments
12.1 The section is derived from the ER Expected Benefits section 🟢 Tiers map to ER Expected Benefits (lines 144–195).
12.2 Key variables are [benefits_high], [benefits_medium], [benefits_low], [benefits_speculative] 🟢 All four variables present (high hidden as no High benefit exists).
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. 🟢 Short key-fact phrasing without magnitudes.
12.4 Parenthetical content — including effect sizes, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved. 🟢 No parenthetical detail in benefit items.
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. 🟢 benefits_high set to display:none (no High-tier benefit in ER).

13. Risks

# Description Result Comments
13.1 The section is derived from the ER Potential Risks & Side Effects section 🟢 Tiers map to ER Risks (lines 213–268).
13.2 Key variables are [risks_high], [risks_medium], [risks_low], [risks_speculative] 🟢 All four variables 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. 🟢 Concise key-fact phrasing.
13.4 Parenthetical content — including frequencies, severity grades, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved. 🟢 ER “(t10,c12 isomer)” qualifier stripped from risks_medium.
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 sub-sections have items.

14. Monitoring

# Description Result Comments
14.1 The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section 🟢 Table mirrors ER Monitoring Protocol (lines 399–409).
14.2 All measurable/quantifiable biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed 🟢 All nine markers (glucose, insulin, HbA1c, total chol, HDL, triglycerides, Lp(a), ALT, hs-CRP) present.
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. 🟢 “Baseline before starting, recheck at 8–12 weeks, then every 6–12 months” matches ER line 397.

15. Qualitative Assessment

# Description Result Comments
15.1 The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section 🟢 Items taken from ER qualitative markers (lines 413–416).
15.2 All subjective/qualitative biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed 🟢 All four qualitative markers present (waist/clothing, energy/performance, digestive comfort, well-being).

Issues 21/06/2026 01:05

Pass rate 100.00%. No issues found.

Issues 21/06/2026 01:01

  1. 11.1 — Reassessment is not time-to-effect: The third time-to-effect cell (time_3, lines 503-513) shows “Reassessment 8–12 weeks”, which is a monitoring/protocol cadence rather than a distinct time-to-effect aspect for a benefit.

Fixes 21/06/2026 01:01

  1. 11.1 — Reassessment is not time-to-effect: Reframed the third time-to-effect cell from the monitoring cadence “Reassessment / 8–12 weeks” to a genuine time-to-effect aspect “Overall horizon / Months, not days”, with sub “Effects build and fade slowly over weeks; judge results over months” (ER lines 132, 328, 371).

Issues 21/06/2026 00:57

  1. 14.2 — AST biomarker omitted: The ER monitoring table treats AST (aspartate aminotransferase) as a paired liver-enzyme marker alongside ALT (“pair with AST”, ER line 408), but the QRS Monitoring table lists ALT only and omits AST.

Fixes 21/06/2026 00:57

  1. 14.2 — AST liver enzyme surfaced: Changed Monitoring marker 8 name from “ALT” to “ALT (with AST)” so the paired liver enzyme the ER calls for (“pair with AST”, ER line 408) is no longer omitted; ALT’s existing target and rationale are retained as the ER provides no separate AST range.