[alexashka]

> What often stops otherwise suicidal folks is that it's not an easy thing to do

Assuming you are acting in good faith - please give this a minute of thought.

The link you provided giving the 5.4% number - did you fail to read on to see what happened afterwards? To 81.8% of them within one year, explained in the very same paragraph?

Do you see how that 81.8% figure undermines your argument?

[nimih]

The 81.8% is out of the 5.4%. (In fact, it is out of a subpopulation of the 5.4%--it is the rate at which, given that the person died by suicide, but survived the first attempt, died within the subsequent year).

From the study:

> During the study period, 81/1,490 enrollees (5.4%) died by suicide. Of the 81, 48 (59.3%) perished on index attempt; 27 of the surviving 33 index attempt survivors (81.8%) killed themselves within a year.

[alexashka]

Ok I've had to double check to see where we've gone wrong.

5.4% is the number of people who died by suicide out of the studied sample. It is not the number of suicide attempts resulting in death, as implied by the original parent.

It is actually 59.3% success on first attempt, and of those who failed on first try, 81.8% succeed in subsequent attempts within a year.

[nimih]

I think you're still a bit confused. 81.8% refers to, out of the population which _both_ failed in their first suicide attempt, _and also_ eventually (within the study observation window, i.e. 3-25 years) dies of suicide, the proportion who die within year 1 rather than years 2-25. In fact, the study authors point out that they found follow-up attempts _less_ likely to succeed compared to the initial attempt:

> Of the cohort, 3.2% (48/1,490) died on index attempt, whereas only 2.3% (33/1,442) of index attempt survivors went on to kill themselves. This drop in the suicide rate for survivors compared with those dead on index attempt held true for both men and women (males: from 6.7% to 4.8%; women: from 1.2% to 0.9%).

[alexashka]

Thanks, I am no longer confused.

[ShamelessC]

> Ok I've had to double check to see where we've gone wrong.

It's okay to admit you're wrong without these sort of "include everyone else involved" type of statements.