The belief that proven exists is the bigger problem. Things are proven mathematically within a single model, nothing in reality is proven. There is only a scal

The belief that proven exists is the bigger problem. Things are proven mathematically within a single model, nothing in reality is proven. There is only a scale from models that are more useful and likely to give us what we want, and models that are less likely. But, things can be disproved. So if we have a single case against a model, we know it does not hold 100%. The model is then insufficient. In that sense, we need to know: are the medicinal models presented to us known to not be the most useful and likely to help us? If they're not, then they're still valuable, and we should be happy that we're improving them at a high pace, giving us the impression previous models were wrong, yet models are not wrong, just less useful and likely to help us, but if it was still the best we had, your chances were still better following it.