> ...therefore I judge the title as "click-bait-y" I think you're out-of-line here. It's fine to be suspicious of relative percentages, but that just means yo

> ...therefore I judge the title as "click-bait-y" I think you're out-of-line here. It's fine to be suspicious of relative percentages, but that just means you need to dig into the numbers to understand it. In this case underlying numbers are huge... With a population of 22 million, this is a drop from about 12,500 suicides to around 3,700 per year. And, the suicide rates themselves are high as your own source points out, so a large proportionate change is quite significant from that perspective as well. Your argument would make sense for a similar proportionate change for a country near the bottom of of the wikipedia list, but not the top. To your second point, yes, it's hard to have complete certainty (there's no way to ethically or morally test something like this in a scientifically rigorous way) but they do attempt to account for other factors. It's not like people shouldn't try to reduce suicide rates and attempt to measure the results of those efforts the best they can, simply because they can't have rigorous certainty in those measurements.