Mr Boodram should refrain from stifling my voice (Pt 2)

Dear Editor,
My recent letters on suicide generated two responses entitled: “The suicide rate reduction is real,” and “It is the walk, not the talk that makes the critical difference”, from Annand Boodram, the Executive Director of The Caribbean Voice (TCV).
The catastrophic social, economic and political dynamic is the generator of abnormal quantities of stress which largely pushes Guyana’s suicide rate over the global average.  Editor, stress has the amazing ability to induce and or exacerbate mental illness, alcoholism, copycatting, relapse, impulsivity and an assortment of personality disorders, etc.  Moreover, stress alters the hardwiring in multiple neuronal circuits in augmenting suicidal responses by unleashing depression, hopelessness, and anxiety, etc.  Stress even diminishes the ability to cope. My view remains pivotal to effectively tackle the suicide problem from multiple angles, plus added benefits on domestic violence; mental illness and alcoholism can be derived when stress is given centre stage attention.
Mr Boodram is now up against the wall. It would be hard for him to go anywhere without accepting that stress largely propels the magnitude of the suicide crisis in this country and this has to be addressed through a simultaneous reduction of stressful inputs into the brain which translates into lowering the unemployment rate, lowering the crime rate, curbing cruelty and ending dysfunctional politics etc, in conjunction with the administration of multifaceted therapies. It makes no sense whatsoever to deny stress centre stage attention. I have tied together these very ideas and explain them in two letters to the editor and also in the model I have developed.  Surely, Mr Boodram will benefit from this model which I will release in the near future.
I must thank TCV for its contributions to the Guyanese people. However, I must point out that Mr Boodram’s uneven behaviours force me to question whether his talk can really translate into a meaningful walk.
I would like to remind Mr Boodram that his actions influence the nature of this rebuttal.  And it would be wise for Mr Boodram to embrace my proposal which embodies that stress robustly drives the bulk of suicide in multiple ways by disrupting homeostatic brain functions. I am confident that such knowledge will guide our efforts in developing novel approaches to combating this human tragedy from multiple angles. With this, I urge Mr Boodram to refocus his attention on stress as the key propeller to the suicide scourge, not copycatting.

Sincerely,
Dr Annie Baliram