My book on NDEs and the AWARE studies
I have finally finished my new book. It has been through a few rounds of editing with professionals and I am happy with it but would love to have your opinions so that I can improve it still further. I uploaded it on Amazon today. The Kindle version is available now globally. The paperback is available in the US now but might take a day or so to appear in other markets. Other eBook store versions will appear over the weekend in new posts. I have currently priced it as cheap as possible for a week or two specifically so that any who comes to this site regularly might buy a copy before I add a few dollars so I can hopefully start recouping some of the costs.
If you have enjoyed my posts over the years, then I think you will enjoy it.
A few points:
- If you buy it, thank you. Please provide feedback in one of two ways:
- If you like it, then please please write a review on the amazon website and give it lots of stars!
- If you don’t like it, I would be grateful that rather than slating it on the sales page for the book which will pretty much kill it, and be somewhat frustrating after all the work I have put in, please provide honest feedback to me via a PM on here, and I will see if it is something that I can address. I will be taking all feedback and doing a final version in February, so constructive criticism is very welcome, and if there are any inaccuracies, please let me know.
- While I do discuss “God” or the Being Of Light, this book is completely ecumenical. I have stripped out any references or preferences to specific religions except for a short passage for fellow Christians in the appendix.
- If you do enjoy it then please recommend it to friends and family. The paperback should be ready soon and while for the next week it will only be available on Amazon, I will be widening availability to all on line bookstores within a couple of weeks and posting on here when that process is complete.
- I’ve realised one thing I will be changing, and that is in the acknowledgements. There have been some really helpful contributions from people on this site, so I will include something on that in the opening.
Great News! Thanks for the work and congratulations!
Just waiting for the paperback edition to order it from Spain!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks, should be in the next few days.
This is fantastic news Orson. Hopefully nobody tries to dismiss this solely because of your religious beliefs. I read a bit of the preview and it certainly had me interested!
The first version which this site was named after was stuffed full of religion. That has been stripped out.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Probably for the best honestly. You know how cynical commenters tend to be to a religious scientist.
Not to change the subject, but I imagine both your book and Greyson’s are well-timed. This Independent article suggests there’s perhaps a coming greater interest in NDEs and their authenticity in particular now following the Surviving Death documentary…and that some of those IMDB reviewers are probably being dishonest about the ‘lack of skepticism’: https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/features/surviving-death-netflix-series-review-b1783962.html
I have to admit, the knowledge that the Netflix series and Greyson’s book were coming certainly gave me a kick up the behind!
LikeLiked by 1 person
That’s awesome Orson!
I will definitely buy it! 2021 starts pretty good 😀
Hello, just bought the book and am so excited to read it. I just had one small aesthetic suggestion for the cover – I think it would look better if the colon after NDE was removed….just a thought. Good luck and best wishes : )
Hi Anna, thanks for the suggestion. You know, you’re probably right, and its going to bug me now, especially as you can’t titles once you have created an ISBN! It was a hang over from my book on DNA and the graphic designer shoved it in there and I didn’t really notice.
Thanks Ben, I didn’t realize it was the same design as DNA but that makes sense now. I never noticed it on the other cover so maybe it’s just me. It looks great anyway and I’m excited to read it…heading to do that just now in fact!
It looks great and will be a great read I am sure. Thanks again!
Awaiting the paper copy. Estimated arrival start of feb
Apologies for shifting the topic somewhat, but I came across this criticism of Parnia from someone aware of the AWARE II study on a forum. She accuses him of being unscientific for ‘jumping to conclusions’. Since this blog isan excellent source for the information on Parnia, I thought you guys would be interested addressing it:
“If you actually look at the studies, you will find that they aren’t all they’re cracked up to be. Take Sam Parnia, for instance. I’d be more interested in what the findings are in AWARE II which won’t end until May. Of 160 cardiac arrest survivors, 101 told him stories, but only 1 was able to be “verified” in some manner that you can’t access unless you pay for his article. But it wasn’t by them being able to tell him what pictures he had up facing the ceiling, because the cardiac arrest didn’t take place where the pictures were. So how is he “verifying?” And how does he know that the experience happened after their heart and brain stopped working? Again…you’ll only know if you buy the article.
But we do know what other scientists are saying about the study. They’re saying that Parnia jumps to conclusions that are not based on evidence… (goes on to cite those 2017 criticisms of Parnia from Wikipedia in 2017)”
-So first of all, I’m fairly certain we know now about the ‘verified’ hits from the first AWARE study and why they weren’t ‘good’ enough. She did not. Anyways, continuing…
“In the free preview of his study, he is claiming to be objective, but he is making some pretty wild assumptions based on 1 patient. By the way he reacts to very questionable “evidence” from 1 patient…I think he is hardly objective. He already seems to have a belief and he’s trying to use science to prove it. But when you have 2060 patients, 160 survivors, 101 stories, and only 1 questionably verified out of that…and you think it proves some fantastic thing? That’s not exactly scientific. ”
Given what Parnia has said in other interviews prior to this 2017 comment and since then, this is again a bit of a slanderous claim. Parnia has professed skepticism of NDEs before, so am I right in thinking she’s misinterpreted the study?
I think her criticism is fair and I would like to see Parnia engaged with by someone willing to really put him through the wringer so-to-speak in order to verify his objectivity. I think Parnia having his own lab in a hospital like NYU Langone should say a lot about his trustworthiness but I do fear that he jumps to conclusions too quickly with too small of a result pool. He’s a very smart guy and seems willing to take criticism so I hope one day he will address criticisms such as these. Of course anything new is always met with some hostility but with a subject of this depth skepticism is warranted. Healthy skepticism I should add, not the kind of skepticism ready to pounce based on preconcieved notions of what Parnia is doing. 101 stories should be further divided into considering if those stories were OBEs or classic “tunnel” NDE experiences. Here’s hoping to a successful AWARE II study! I hope Dr. Parnia will address all common sense criticisms with facts to back him up!
LikeLiked by 1 person
She is wrong about 101 people having stories. I think he only interviewed 101, but only about 10% had any NDE type recollections. Need to go back and check the numbers again. Yes, in AWARE I only one person had a visual OBE, and this was “verified” by human means since the pictures were not in the room, and therefore, although t took place within the context of a clinical study, it was nonetheless no more than previously occurred.
I do not agree with the position that Parnia jumps to conclusions. He believes based on the evidence he has seen with his own eyes, which consists of his own ER experiences, and those of many of his credible colleagues. This is the point I make in my book. There is plenty of evidence, but people do not choose to believe it. Even if AWARE II gets a hit or two, they still will not believe.
Unfortunately the pace at which AWARE II was able to recruit participants means it is unlikely to produce any results any time soon…unless we get lucky. AWARE III is a different matter though.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I will be “unpublishing” my book today as I have found a few errors and a couple of statements which I am not happy with.