Suicide has become a kind of epidemic of the twenty-first century. In Spain, for example, it is The second external cause of deathIt is preceded only by an accidental fall. In 2023 alone, 4,116 people died due to this issue in the country.
If you look at the data around the world, the World Health Organization estimates that About 727,000 cases of self-analysis are performed each year, and many more fail in the attempt. These numbers show the necessity of investigating this phenomenon in order to provide adequate prevention.
Perhaps a group of scholars saw that He was looking in the wrong direction. Their study, published recently, showed that in nearly half of the suicide cases there were no previous suicidal attempts or ideation.
They also did not find a greater genetic predisposition to neuropsychiatric diseases or diagnoses of these diseases in this group. Researchers He evaluated 2,769 deaths due to autolysis in Utah, USA: 1,432 people with previous attempts and 1,337 without attempts.
They also used a control group of 20,000 individuals and measured genetic risk For 12 neuropsychiatric cases and other characteristics such as alcohol consumption, smoking, or Alzheimer’s disease.
Those who had not made previous suicide attempts did Much lower genetic degree From those suffering from major depression, depression, anxiety, neuroticism (emotional instability) and Alzheimer’s disease. They also score lower on post-traumatic stress, bipolar disorder, and schizophrenia.
Compared with the control group, no greater risk was observed; In fact, it was at quite similar levels, which may indicate this They have no greater genetic vulnerability than those who did not undergo self-analysis.
Such findings, says Miguel Guerrero, a clinical psychologist at the Andalusian Health Service (SAS). Demonstrate the flaws of the traditional biomedical model In suicide prevention, which attempts to predict risk based on lists of factors, but they are sensitive and non-specific.
“Many people with risk factors will never engage in suicidal behavior, instead Many of those who died had no identified “classic” factors.“, he sums up.
In suicide prevention, the psychologist explains, We need to talk less about genes, biomarkers or neuromodulation And more about poverty, discrimination, harassment, violence, abuse, trauma, human rights, social inequality or social stigma. He emphasizes that all of this is evident in results such as the results of this research.
Greater rush
The authors of this study saw that both subgroups of people committed suicide They had a greater genetic predisposition To develop attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, autism, and alcohol consumption than the control group.
These factors are strongly linked Impulse control problemsSo the information doesn’t seem foreign to him, Guerrero says.
Impulsivity makes emotional regulation difficult and preferable Desire for quick responses to discomfort. Therefore, it may be a key to both suicidal readiness and the sudden shift from crisis to unplanned self-harm behavior.
Rethinking prevention
This search He “strongly” questions the idea of a single nucleus to prevent autolysis It shows that predisposition to certain disorders is not a single element, nor is it present in all cases. It is not the central factor.
Of course, this does not mean that these diseases are not a risk factor, because they are, however “They are another one, and they are not decisive,” It was developed by psychologist SAS.
This is not the first time that science has provided evidence of this. A 2017 meta-analysis already showed that classic factors considered in suicide prevention, They expected it little better than chance The model has not improved in decades.
This means that although depression is frequently seen in those who commit suicide, its presence is also very common in the general population, Guerrero explains. Therefore, Pathology is of little use To distinguish who is truly at risk.
The SAS psychologist celebrates that the paradigm is changing and that there are already new methodologies that are rethinking the concept of self-harm risk. “It is seen as a dynamic and fluctuating state situated in a context and given Prevention is less focused on labeling and more on understanding the individual“.
Moreover, not seeing it this way and reducing suicide to a predictive model is also a mistake, Guerrero says. ‘Not viable’ Because it can create a false sense of control.
All this change in the autolysis model allows More personalized, fast and effective interventionsHe defends. “Not every suicide carries a high psychological burden. We are obliged to expand the scope of prevention beyond the field of neuroscience and biological psychiatry.”
On the other hand, the SAS expert realizes that although suicide cannot be ended, it is Yes, their numbers can be reduced significantly. For this reason, “global, selective and specific” prevention strategies are needed.
It may seem like a very technical concept, however Prevention is anything that reduces sufferingGuerrero recalls. Actions that give people hope or reduce their feeling of being trapped in a crisis, but above all, allow them to connect with life and enhance the desire to live.
In the case of people who commit suicide without any prior signs from their environment allowing them to receive help, this indicates that Prevention cannot depend on the presence of signsSays the psychologist.
Some of them are: social withdrawal, irritability, sleep disturbances, loss of interest or more subtle signs of emotional distress. It may be worth paying attention to, but consider it the only indicator It can give a false sense of security Or even cause a misinterpretation.
The most effective strategy, according to Guerrero, is encouragement Open, honest and direct communication With people and address the issue directly and without fear. “From there, you can help, protect and care in a tangible and humane way, while providing listening, accompaniment and access to professional support if necessary.”