Audit: QRS - Ivermectin to Treat Cancer

Audit conducted on 29/06/2026 00:43 using AI4L / Opus 4.8

Iterations

Summary

Items	Count
Total	91
Passed	83
Failed	0
N/A	8
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 content (at-a-glance, protocol, gates, benefits, risks, monitoring, qualitative) traces to ER passages.
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.	🟢	“benefit in people remains unproven”, “Not established”, “cannot be attributed to the drug with confidence” all mirror ER cautious phrasing.
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/softening; “Never a replacement” and contraindications match ER intensity.
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/interactions come from ER Key Interactions & Contraindications; no modifying factors relabeled.
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.	🟢	QRS contains no PMIDs, NCT IDs, expert names, or brand names.
1.6	The QRS does not introduce new attributions.	🟢	No new attributions 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.	🟢	Cautious, balanced tone matches ER (promising-but-unproven framing).
2.2	The tone of the QRS is simultaneously expert, accessible, objective, and data-driven, but also empowering and encouraging	🟢	Expert yet accessible; objective and data-driven.
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	🟢	No directive/advisory phrasing toward a reader.
2.5	The QRS “presents information” instead of “providing guidance”, “recommending”, or “advising”	🟢	Information-presenting throughout.
2.6	The QRS never addresses “the reader” directly — it presents evidence, not guidance	🟢	No second-person address.
2.7	The QRS is written in plain language, avoiding unnecessary medical jargon	🟢	Plain language; technical terms only where appropriate to the card.
2.8	Information is presented in a concise and very compact manner	🟢	Compact card-based layout.
2.9	It DOES NOT address the reader directly	🟢	No direct reader address.
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 suits risk-aware, proactive adults.
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.	🟢	Sourcing/monitoring detail assumes a willing, effort-tolerant 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 written for the general population.
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 reflects the intended 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.	🟢	No “anti-aging” usage 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.	🟢	Uses “oral”, “anti-parasite medicine”, “hepatotoxicity”; no colloquial terms.

3. Template Integrity

#	Description	Result	Comments
3.1	The following labels and headings on the QRS are fixed and not modified:	🟢	“Protocol”, “Time to effect”, “Benefits”, “Risk & Side Effects”, “Monitoring”, “Qualitative Assessment”, “Contraindications”, “Key Interactions”, tier labels, and “Marker/Target/Why” headers all intact.
3.2	All “…” from the [qrs_template] are present in the the QRS.	🟢	All template var spans present, including hidden time_3 and benefits_high/medium.
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”	N/A	No drawn-from ER section is empty; empty-state phrasing not 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.	🟢	Interaction labels (e.g., “CYP3A4 inhibitors”, “Warfarin”) match ER bold labels.
4.3	Labels are not paraphrased, abbreviated, or invented.	🟢	Labels preserved from ER.
4.4	The QRS DOES NOT use emoji indicators (no 🟩, 🟥, 🟨, etc.). Color and emphasis are conveyed through CSS and bold labels.	🟢	No emoji present in content (verified).
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 condensed to single-page 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.	🟢	Metadata comment is first element after 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.	🟢	Inside HTML comment; not rendered.
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.	🟢	Values trimmed; only duration quoted (contains colon).
5.5	The filename of the source ER is stated as “er_filename: [er_filename]”	🟢	er_filename: ivermectin_cancer_2026-0629-0004_Opus_ER.md
5.6	Version of the QRS.md file used to create the document is stated as “qrs_prompt_version: [Version of QRS.md]”	🟢	qrs_prompt_version: 26.5.18 matches 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: 2026-0629-0004.
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)	🟢	“Opus” — 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.
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: ivermectin_cancer_2026-0629-0004_Opus_QRS.html.
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 clean and consistent.

6. Page Title & Header

#	Description	Result	Comments
6.1	[page_title] is set to the [canonical_topic] of the ER frontmatter followed by “ - Quick Reference Sheet” (e.g., “Intervention - Quick Reference Sheet”). The [canonical_topic] is HTML-entity-encoded as needed (e.g., & for &)	🟢	“Ivermectin to Treat Cancer - Quick Reference Sheet”; no entities needed.
6.2	[header_topic] is set to the [canonical_topic] of the ER frontmatter, with HTML entities encoded as needed (e.g., & for &)	🟢	“Ivermectin to Treat Cancer”.
6.3	[header_subline_date] is set to [qrs_creation_date reformatted as MM/DD/YYYY]	🟢	06/29/2026 from 2026-0629.
6.4	[header_subline_model] is set to [qrs_creator_ai_fullname]	🟢	“Opus 4.8”.
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 subline; no extras.

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 Conclusion (lines 393-399).
7.2	[at_a_glance] is no longer than 60 words	🟢	51 words.
7.3	Every fact in [at_a_glance] is supported by a distinct passage in the ER.	🟢	Mechanism, reproducibility, unproven benefit, and replacement danger all sourced from Conclusion.
7.4	It DOES NOT use acronyms or technical classifications that require specialist knowledge, uses plain-language terms instead	🟢	Plain language; no acronyms.
7.5	It DOES NOT cite specific trials (names, years, sample sizes, p-values)	🟢	No trials cited.
7.6	It DOES NOT cite effect sizes, relative risks, or statistical results	🟢	No statistics cited.

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…” bullet (ER line 262).
8.2	[stop_items] represent the Contraindications from the ER	🟢	All five populations represented.
8.3	Individual [stop_items] are formatted as <li></li>	🟢	Five <li> items.
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; no trailing 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).	🟢	“(Child-Pugh Class B–C)” preserved.
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	ER uses no “>” ranking notation.
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	🟢	Derived from ER interaction bullets (lines 248-260).
9.2	[caution_items] represent the Key Interactions from the ER, excluding any that are already listed as Contraindications	🟢	Seven interaction items; the populations bullet (contraindications) excluded.
9.3	Individual [caution_items] are formatted as <li></li>	🟢	Seven <li> items.
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 —” explanations stripped; only label + drug list retained.
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 in parentheses.
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	ER uses no “>” ranking notation in interactions.
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	🟢	Derived from Therapeutic Protocol / Sourcing / Risk Mitigation.
10.2	The three sets of [action] items cover the three most important actionable implementation aspects from the ER Protocol section	🟢	Adjunct-only, dosing/with-food, human-grade sourcing.
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.	🟢	All three action sets meaningfully populated from the ER.

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 offers only two distinct aspects (cancer outcome not established; subjective change weeks-to-months); both captured.
11.2	The sets are picked and ordered by the magnitude of the related benefit	🟢	Cancer outcome first, subjective change second.
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.	🟢	Third cell empty with style=”display:none”.
11.4	All used [time_#label], [time#value], [time#_sub] items are filled with meaningful content derived from the ER.	🟢	Both used sets match ER Practical Considerations (line 333).
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	ER does provide time-to-effect information.

12. Benefits

#	Description	Result	Comments
12.1	The section is derived from the ER Expected Benefits section	🟢	Derived from Expected Benefits (Low and Speculative tiers).
12.2	Key variables are [benefits_high], [benefits_medium], [benefits_low], [benefits_speculative]	🟢	All four variables present (high/medium hidden, low/speculative filled).
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.	🟢	Benefit headings only; explanations stripped.
12.4	Parenthetical content — including effect sizes, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved.	🟢	No parenthetical content retained.
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 and benefits_medium set to display:none (absent in ER).

13. Risks

#	Description	Result	Comments
13.1	The section is derived from the ER Potential Risks & Side Effects section	🟢	Derived from Potential Risks & Side Effects.
13.2	Key variables are [risks_high], [risks_medium], [risks_low], [risks_speculative]	🟢	All four 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.	🟢	Risk headings only; concise.
13.4	Parenthetical content — including frequencies, severity grades, sample notes, mechanistic hints, and example studies — is stripped, NOT preserved.	🟢	“(liver injury)” retained only as the ER’s own label clarifier; no frequencies/sample notes.
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.

14. Monitoring

#	Description	Result	Comments
14.1	The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section	🟢	Derived from Monitoring Protocol table.
14.2	All measurable/quantifiable biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed	🟢	All five (ALT/AST, bilirubin, CBC, CMP, cancer markers/imaging) listed.
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.	🟢	Cadence populated (baseline, 4–8 weeks, oncology schedule).

15. Qualitative Assessment

#	Description	Result	Comments
15.1	The section is derived from the ER Monitoring section	🟢	Derived from ER qualitative markers list.
15.2	All subjective/qualitative biomarkers from the Monitoring section are listed	🟢	All five qualitative markers listed.

Issues 29/06/2026 00:43

Pass rate 100.00%. No issues found.

Issues 29/06/2026 00:39

1. 11.1 — Only two time-to-effect aspects exist: The ER provides just two time-to-effect aspects (no reliable cancer-outcome time; subjective change over weeks to months, ER line 333), so the third [time] set cannot be filled; item 11.1 presumes three exist when the ER supports only two.

Fixes 29/06/2026 00:39

1. 11.1 — Only two time-to-effect aspects exist: Confirmed the ER supplies only two distinct time-to-effect aspects (no reliable cancer-outcome time; subjective change over weeks to months, ER line 333), both already populated in the QRS (time_1, time_2) with the third set hidden via display:none per 11.3. No QRS content change was made because adding a third aspect would fabricate an ER-unsupported claim, violating 1.1/1.6; the QRS already represents all available ER time-to-effect content faithfully.