Sullins' (2022) report about the relationship of sexual orientation change efforts (SOCE) and suicidality among sexual minority persons suffers from a fatal flaw that renders the conclusions of the paper invalid. In Blosnich et al. (2020), we demonstrated that SOCE was associated with higher life-time prevalence of suicide ideation, suicide planning, and suicide attempt with no/minor injury. Sullins critiqued our research because we did not consider the temporal order of SOCE and suicidality, something we clearly discussed in our paper. Sullins used the same Generations data to suggest a different outcome by attempting to create the temporal order of SOCE and suicidality. However, the same limitations that prevented us from assessing temporal order also undermined his findings: no data in the Generations study are available to assess the timing of SOCE initiation, so there is no way to establish temporal order. The only difference between Sullins' and our analysis is that Sullins ignored this significant limitation and proceeded to conclude not only that SOCE was not associated with suicidality but that it was protective. Sullins claimed to correct a "false research narrative" in Blosnich et al. (2020). However, the false narrative that requires correction is Sullins' own conclusions based on misplaced certainty in his faulty methods.