A publication date, an evidence-review date, and a recommendation change are different events. This record keeps them separate. A daily review may correctly conclude that no recommendation should change.
Historical text and data remain available in the repository history. The dates below do not imply that every cited source received a fresh full-text appraisal.
2026-09-27 · A food foundation within the living guide
Version: 0.1.3
Outcome: held
Prepared for manual pull-request review. Added a dedicated food-foundation chapter, integrated it into the reading path and navigation, linked related chapters, and expanded generated-page checks to cover its route. Held denotes awaiting the user’s review and merge, not a clinical safety objection.
Scope of this review
Reconstructed current files and verified their Git blob hashes against fresh main before editing. Read the seven existing guide routes and considered all claims, dependencies, history, style guidance, layout and checks. The Sunday structural review identified whole-diet coverage as a gap beside the detailed training and protein example. Fresh evidence work inspected WHO’s January 26, 2026 fact sheet, the complete AHA official summary and relevant sections of its March 31 explanatory release. Searches included WHO healthy diet 2026; AHA dietary guidance 2026; and DOI 10.1161/CIR.0000000000001435 with processing and correction/erratum/retraction terms. The journal full-text request returned HTTP 403. No exhaustive search, full-paper appraisal, processing-classification review or reassessment of unrelated sources is claimed.
Practical recommendations
No change to the worked training schedule, exercises, loads, progression rule, or 128-gram protein illustration. Added labeled meal-building synthesis and ordinary food-selection guidance, without introducing calorie targets, fasting, supplements or disease-specific diets. Existing claim confidence labels and the unconfirmed H01 hypothesis remain unchanged.
Checks and limitations
Local registry and transition checks and all 16 existing rehearsal tests passed. Full-site build results are recorded separately in the pull request after existing CI completes. The generated-page check now includes the new eighth route without removing existing checks. A full local clone failed because GitHub DNS resolution was unavailable; the full production build uses existing branch/PR CI. This record does not claim production publication, independent clinical review or visual browser verification.
Next unresolved work
Complete the user’s PR review and merge, then verify production separately. Deepen nutrient adequacy, dietary-pattern trials, processing evidence and adaptations across age and ability. Prior held entries remain preserved as their preparation-time history, not rewritten as retrospective release receipts.
2026-09-26 · Protein targets: guidance, training and applicability
Version: 0.1.2
Outcome: held
Prepared for the user’s manual pull-request review. Added population-guidance and research context to the existing protein illustration, with related explanations in the priorities and longevity chapters. The 128-gram example and all training prescriptions remain unchanged.
Scope of this review
Reconstructed the proposed update after confirming the staging branch matched main. Compared current source hashes with the available guide files and considered all seven routes, chapter map, registry, history and verification code. Fresh research was limited to protein: inspected the federal guideline (printed page 2), scientific report (Chapter 6, pages 37–38), Nunes et al. full HTML methods/results/discussion/disclosures, and NIH ODS protein guidance. PDF pages were visually checked. Searches covered the current guideline, the 74-trial review, and DOI/guideline correction queries; this was not an exhaustive search. No appendices or individual trials were reappraised; unrelated sources were not freshly verified.
Practical recommendations
The fictional 80-kilogram trainee still uses 1.6 g/kg/day = 128 g/day. The rationale now distinguishes population guidance, training research and practical synthesis. It does not create a universal minimum, general-health threshold, precise optimum or longevity dose. No new supplement, restrictive diet or disease-specific advice is introduced. Existing confidence labels and H01 remain unchanged.
Checks and limitations
Local registry and transition validation and all 16 rehearsal tests passed. The full site build and generated-page checks use the existing branch/PR workflow because local GitHub DNS resolution failed. This record is a review candidate, not a claim of publication, production verification, independent clinical review or browser-based visual review.
Next unresolved work
User review and merge, followed by separate production verification. Expand dietary-pattern and food-adequacy coverage; investigate protein source and longer-term outcomes. Preserve the previous review entries as the history recorded at preparation time.
2026-09-25 · Full-text resistance-training check; prepared for manual merge
Version: 0.1.1
Outcome: held
Prepared a bounded explanatory update: added the full-text ACSM record, clarified progression and weekly-set counting, and removed stale summary-only access language. Held here means awaiting the user’s requested pull-request review and merge, not a new safety-sensitive recommendation.
Scope of this review
Read all seven guide pages, the complete register, prior history, layout and verification scripts, with the current style rules and daily contract. Inspected ACSM’s official 2026 summary and relevant HTML sections of the full position stand (methods, hypertrophy results, progression, limitations). S04 and S14 share an evidence group. Searches included "2026 ACSM resistance training position stand progressive resistance training hypertrophy volume progression PMC12965823 correction" and "10.1249/MSS.0000000000003897 correction erratum retraction". A progression trial was identified by a further search but not used as inspected support. No exhaustive search, supplement review or reappraisal of every constituent review is claimed. Existing non-ACSM sources were not freshly reverified.
Practical recommendations
No change to the example’s exercises, frequency, set counts, aerobic schedule or protein target. Clarified the distinction between a starting plan and additional hypertrophy work, and between progression over time and compulsory weight increases each session. R02 remains a coaching synthesis. H01 remains unconfirmed, outside default advice. Existing confidence labels were not upgraded.
Checks and limitations
Source-to-claim and whole-guide consistency review completed. Local registry and transition checks passed, along with all 16 rehearsal tests. Full-site build and generated-page checks are delegated to the existing branch/PR workflow because a full networked local checkout is unavailable. This is a review-branch candidate, not a verified production release; no independent clinical review or visual browser verification is claimed.
Next unresolved work
Complete the user’s manual pull-request review and merge only after the existing checks pass. Then verify the production release separately. Further research priorities remain dietary-pattern adequacy, constituent evidence for progression and hypertrophy dose, and adaptations across age and ability.
2026-09-24 · The founding edition
Version: 0.1.0
Outcome: published
Established the health-first charter, three connected chapters, an explicit worked week, a protein-arithmetic example, source-access records, and whole-guide dependency checks. This is a pilot foundation rather than completed coverage of nutrition and fitness.
Scope of this review
Read the complete initial guide and inspected 13 institutional or research sources through targeted lookup. Included current ACSM and WHO summaries, concurrent-training research, and methods guidance. This was not an exhaustive database search or a formal systematic review; source-specific access limitations are recorded. The mortality meta-analysis was inspected at abstract level only.
Practical recommendations
Initial publication; there is no previous guide recommendation to reverse. The sample week and 128-gram protein calculation are practical illustrations, not validated optima or lifespan prescriptions. The fallback-adherence hypothesis remains unconfirmed and is not used to justify a superiority claim.
Checks and limitations
The repository contains executable registry checks and 16 rehearsal tests. They test traceability and release mechanics, not medical accuracy. Build and test execution results are recorded by the Long Game checks workflow; no independent clinical review has occurred.
Next unresolved work
Inspect the full 2026 resistance-training position stand and its relevant constituent evidence; deepen dietary-pattern and food-adequacy coverage; examine progression and hypertrophy volume; develop evidence-supported adaptations for older adults and differing physical capabilities.