Use this forum to post questions about syntax problems or general programming issues. Questions on implementing a particular aspect of econometrics should go in "Econometrics Issues" below.
Actually, the NLLS FRML would (theoretically) give the correct minimum mean square forecasts for the level IF (and that's a big if) the errors were assumed to be homoscedastic in that model. The bias discussed in the blog comes about because if you assume instead that the residuals are homoscedastic in
(*) log(y) = a+bx+u
then forecasting y by exp(a+bx) does not give the minimum mean square error forecasts for y as a positive u will have a larger effect on y then an equally negative u. The bias correction can be done by scaling up by exp(%seesq/2):
set logy = log(ces7072200001)
linreg(frml=logfrml) y startdate enddate resids3
#constant trend
set yhat = exp(logfrml)*exp(%seesq/2)
Note, by the way, that if (*) with homoscedastic u is the correct model, you would expect that if you estimate it in the exponential form y=exp(a+bx), the a in that would be roughly a in the log-linear regression + log(%seesq/2)---it should give a consistent, but not efficient estimate of the same function.