I am in good company!
It appears that I am not the only one who finds Parnia’s disinhibition assertions disconcerting (try saying that fast after a couple of glasses of wine!).
It is fine theorising that this may be what is going on, but the fact is some of his comments regarding the factuality of his hypothesis to the media (the Guardian and BBC in particular) seem to move beyond the word “may” to “is”. I have provided examples of this in previous posts, and it seems that two of the most respected researchers in this field have made some comments, to which Parnia has decided to reply in the journal (click on the pic for full article):
Now I can’t find the original comments, but it seems they stated that the subjects were not conscious. The fact is we do not know what was going on, so it is wrong to assert that there is or is not activity of any kind that is truly conscious. Since the vast majority of examples of EEG activity were in patients who sadly died, we do not know whether they had conscious experiences. Personally I believe the patients with EEG activity may have had some sort of CPRIC episode if anything, but I do not know that, no more than Parnia knows whether they had a disinhibition episode.
The fact is that only 2 of the 28 patients who were interviewed had interpretable EEG data. It is not mentioned whether there was activity or not, but either way these patients were not in the 11 who had recollections from their time during CA. If anything this would provide evidence against Parnia’s hypothesis.
I think that it is OK hypothesising as he does in the paper, but some of his recent media noise has gone beyond this, and I suspect that is why these two great men have given their esteemed colleague an academic poke. A part of me wonders if he is playing a much deeper game here, but I will keep my thoughts on that to myself.
AwareofAware 
Parnia is puzzling…in a video he stated that: “We were able to demonstrate that the belief that the brain dies after 5 to 10 minutes is wrong,” says Parnia in a video.
But when Parnia talks about those 10 minutes to reach irreversible permanent damage, it is understood (logically assumed) that they refer to a situation with no CPR….
Nevertheless, Parnia relates it to “signs of electrical recovery that would indicate that the brain is robust”. Parnia seems to overlook that the same (signs of electrical recovery) occur precisely because there is minimal blood flow due to the application of CPR….
I think one could only consider what Parnia says as a valid statement or of some weight if the resuscitations in Aware II had only started after 10 minutes after arrest and not before, as in fact actually happened. In his Aware II study, the CPRs performed by Parnia’s team began on average 5 minutes after arrest…. And furthermore, according to the report in Resuscitation, patients were already being cared for before those 5 minutes by a resuscitation team other than their own (Parnia’s), which was trying to rescue the patient immediately until the Aware II team arrived.
…In short, we do not understand what the supposed finding that Dr. Parnia pretends to present consists of.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Even if the AWARE II study had EEG data showing conscious correlates in patients who also recalled a visual experience, it wouldn’t make much difference.
The next objection would be: ‘how do we know these conscious correlates are correlated with the NDE?’ And even if this could be overcome in some way, they would still garner objections as to whether the conscious correlates were generated solely by the brain (in isolation), or not.
What is needed to resolve this issue directly, is a way of tying the rarer recalled out of body experiences back to verifiable visual targets that can be seen by everyone. I hoped AWARE II was going to address this issue, but after the study design became known, it was they were going to hide the visual targets yet again.
Unfortunately researchers into NDE’s/OBE’s either don’t use visual targets, or if they do, they hide them where no one can see them.
Before NDE researchers get ahead of themselves trying to test whether experients actually leave their body, lets just try verifying whether the recalled visual OBE contains accurate information, through the use of randomly located visual targets that everyone can see.
LikeLiked by 2 people
It’s interesting and makes me wonder if studying OBEs via targets in cardiac arrest is the best way to go about it. DHCA would be great. But there seems to be a large community of people who have spontaneous OBEs.
If I had the time and resources I would create a task force to locate these individuals, and the most credible I would test in lab settings with a target (as did Charles Tart). There are groups whos members claim this ability.
My thinking is that the best we could have gotten out of aware is an obe timed during CA with no EEG data. Short of that any nde recall could be explained away as based on an active brain or pre/post CA. It would be good to try something new.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Go beyond the mask, the content is very valid. In the video, years and years of paranormal studies, distant views and out-of-body studies are shown with documents in hand. They are intelligence documents from the United States / Russia other…
LikeLiked by 1 person
“A part of me wonders if he is playing a much deeper game here, but I will keep my thoughts on that to myself.”
LikeLike
Apologies Ben. I hit reply prematurely. I had quoted an excerpt of your post wondering if you could elaborate on what your thoughts were on what Parnia’s obscured strategy might be.
LikeLike
Hi Thomas,
Appreciate your curiosity, but as I said I will keep my thoughts to myself on this. If you are into sport there is an expression “selling a dummy”. That’s all I will say.
LikeLike
Did you notice that Sam Parnia has a book coming out in 2024: Lucid Dying: The New Science Revolutionizing How We Understand Life and Death https://amzn.eu/d/hDjj57W
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hi Iris,
Thanks for posting the link. We had heard about it, but thanks for this as it gives us a date.
LikeLike
This really is very frustrating from the blurb:
“These studies also show that there is a universal experience of death that is meaningful, transcendent, positive, and transformative”
That just isn’t true. A significant minority have a very different experience from this and no, it is not CPRIC. Truth is paramount (after love), but there is nothing loving about hiding unpleasant truths. We need to know that there is not always a flowers and roses ending, and maybe think about why that might be and how to avoid it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I absolutely agree. There is also a significant amount of non-Western NDEs in the literature that are nothing like Western NDEs. They might loosely follow the same structure but usually don’t include, for example, the life-review from other people’s perspective. I have hight regards for Dr. Parnia but he seems to be quite selective at times.
LikeLiked by 1 person
A new study on the dying brain
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-12865193/Scientists-tell-DailyMail-com-one-step-closer-reversing-process-dying-discovering-EXACTLY-brains-wave-death-begins.html
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks Bill. That is a great article (especially given it is in a tabloid). I will have to read the full paper and maybe do a write up of it. On first analysis it is an incremental step forward in our understanding of what happens to the brain at death. Much of this was known in broad strokes but they are getting a deeper understanding of the exact processes and timelines. Of course they only entertain materialistic hypotheses relating to this.
LikeLike
Dr. Parnia new book.is called Lucid Dying. You can preorder it on amazon
LikeLiked by 1 person
What are the implications of this then? Does he now believe that NDEs are fake and that the brain produces consciousness?
LikeLiked by 1 person
No, he has just created a way of explaining that as the consciousness leaves it is causing EEG activity without the materialists noticing. However, the theory doesn’t really stand up to scrutiny when it comes to his own data. By the time they start measuring EEG the consciousness has most likely long since gone and the data is likely due t CPR causing the brain to attempt to reboot. If it was early in the CPR, like straight after CA, it would be different.
LikeLiked by 1 person
No blood flow. No consciousness. It’s quite simple really. EEG proves nothing. The person is DEAD. So why does the experience occur? This is the main thing that makes me think that the brain may not be all that there is. There’s an outlying force that’s doing this. We may not be who we think we are. We could be something more.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Would someone be able to shed light on this recent study for me?
https://neurosciencenews.com/death-brain-neuroscience-25356/
LikeLiked by 1 person
My main possible takeaway from it is that it does hold a candle to a possible theory of consciousness being created by the brain, but we have no idea how advanced a rat’s consciousness is. It’s implying a possible theory for where near death experiences come from, but it doesn’t explain out of body experiences or shared death experiences at all. In these studies they tend to just focus on NDEs and not OBEs. Also, if NDEs are a product of a dying brain and not a “real” experience, why do they share common themes all over the world? Why do atheists experience them? Why do most people come back with a message of peace and love to share? I can be really skeptical of NDEs but I’m also skeptical of some scientists who seem to ignore OBEs. It’s odd. I’m no expert, just thought I’d toss my opinion in here instead of lurking as usual. I’ve been a lurker on this blog for 2+ years now.
Anyway, besides my opinion, can anyone who has a better knowledge on gamma and beta waves take a glance over that? Didn’t the AWARE study measure those as not being related to conscious activity? Correct me if I’m wrong on that.
LikeLike
I’m not sure it adds much from our perspective. It provides more detail regarding the precise mechanisms of what occurs during deoxygenation of the brain and then depolarisation. It points to the possibility of restoring brain function if careful resuscitation techniques, and neuroprotective drugs are used. They speculate that the EEG activity associated with these two processes may be related to NDEs. That is all fine.
We have discussed the previous rat study before, the coma patients, and Parnia’s data, and any association of brain activity with NDEs at this stage is purely speculative…unless they managed to interview any of the surviving rats and they told stories of being transported to a heavenly realm, and meeting a transcendent ultra loving rat being!
LikeLike
Okay. Yeah that makes sense. It kind of worried me because it just seems like more and more brain activity is being found but I only vaguely understand the scientific write ups but wasn’t sure if this really added anything beyond Parnia’s data.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I just watched one of Bruce Greyson’s powerpoint videos today on the subject, basically refuting all the skeptic points, and he did mention “They claim this, but never interviewed any of the rats!” Which was pretty damn funny and true. I don’t really think the rat studies will get us closer to an answer on *human* consciousness… but hey, you never know. I agree that it’s still a very interesting study.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ben Williams you think that there is a life after that? I really hope that because eucharistic Miracles could be a proof of it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I really do think there is life after death.
LikeLike
I enjoy watching Bruce Greyson interviews. Hes à true scientist. His book After is à good read
LikeLiked by 1 person
Just noticed this is for preorder on Amazon. Not sure if I missed this blog talking about this book yet but the synopsis sounds like we have nothing to worry about 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hi Nic,
Yes, this has been noticed on here, and I agree…nothing ground breaking by the looks of it.
LikeLike
Might the possibility of Parnia – between now and the release of Lucid Dying – come to a conclusion or make a public statement that contradicts an assertion he made in the book? Perhaps. I’m not trying to cast aspersions, but he is a bit of a moving target.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I can’t wait to read it. Still haven’t heard anything about releasing Rethinking death either
LikeLike
Do we see a pattern with researchers into ndes who going into the research with a bit of skepticism or playing devils advocate and as they continue researchng the topic they go all in? We see this with Melvin Morse who’s early books had a skeptical feel to it but speaking to him over the last few years we find him all in on ndes.
I think we all go into research with an agenda. Many may want to either find supporting evidence or to debunk. I’ve always looked at Parnia as one seeking supporting evidence. In this case with the eeg data post cardiac arrest, this data might be seen as data debunking ndes. Perhaps that triggered a strong need for him to turn the tables and advocate for an explanation that is supportive of the reality of ndes. That was my original impression.
The more I read ndes the more I find them supportive of an afterlife. At some point no more convincing is needed. It becomes more of seeking ways to explain the world we live in with the assumption that this is all true. A paradigm shift.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Your last point is the tone I am now adopting in the latest revision of my book which includes the AWARE II data. Should be available next week
When you look at some verified OBEs, they are every bit as good in terms of evidence as one that might have been reported in AWARE II. We have enough evidence now, and trying to make sense of it is the next step.
That is very challenging when you look at the lack of consistency when it comes to reports of things beyond “the tunnel”. Some things are consistent in terms of subjective presentation, like the ultra loving being of light, meeting relatives, life review, but the setting and perception of surroundings is wildly varied. I am writing another book that is specifically focusing on the Christian context of all this and how while it validates much of what we are taught by Jesus, it also challenges certain aspects of Christian orthodoxy.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ben, I encourage you to also take into account the evidence from non-Western near-death experiences (NDEs). While it’s natural to interpret these experiences within a Christian framework, it’s important to recognize that some aspects of NDEs, such as encounters with ‘the being of light’, might be influenced by cultural contexts. Exploring these diverse perspectives could offer a more comprehensive understanding of NDEs.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hi Steen,
I am familiar with some of the non-Western NDEs, and that people have different experiences, often shaped by their cultural understanding. I am curious as to why their experiences differ in certain ways, and not just non-westerners, but westerners who have no faith sometimes have experiences that are very different from the classic ones that we hear about most. Rather than distinctive landscapes and people, there are shapes colours and orbs.
Observing the highly diverse nature of NDE reports has caused me to alter my attitude towards the subjective post OBE part of NDEs, and my opinion of what they represent and mean is still forming. However, there are some fundamental truths that I am certain of:
1. There is a specific creator being of unimaginable intelligence. The science of the origin of DNA proves this beyond any doubt, as I demonstrate in my book on the subject. So there is a creator God with a specific mind.
2. Through my own experience…one transcendental, and many many times through worship, I have encountered a being of immense love…exactly like the one described in NDEs. Therefore in my inner self I am certain of the nature of this being, and encouraged by corroboration from other accounts.
3. I have accessed this being and this love through faith in Jesus Christ, who claimed to be God himself. I have absolutely no doubt that his words are the words of life, and while there are many worthy sayings and teachings from other wise men that lead to a good and noble life, from what I have read, there are none so perfect and complete as those of Jesus.
While open to the idea that anyone who truly seeks truth and seeks God will find what they are looking for, having found truth that I have tested myself, and met God in a very real and transformative way, why would I not believe what that being tells me and follow the way that works for me? Why would I consider alternative understandings for myself? That may mean that this blog is not everyone for it impossible for that bias not to leak into my musings, but that is fine with me.
On the issue of the diversity of experience, there are tidbits that I have heard from NDErs that may help in understanding why that is:
The first is that NDErs have been told that they only experience what they need to so they can develop further, and that what is revealed to them is only a glimpse of what lies beyond. After the initial moments in this realm, it is a tailored experience just for them.
The second is that in this life we must have free will. That is why evil exists, so that we have a choice. If everyone comes back with exactly the same story, then the consistency would make it hard to believe anything but what is told, but the diversity of experience that people are “allowed” to have and then share, gives those who hear about the experiences the choice to continue to pursue the truth for themselves, which I have no doubt is one of the core objectives of our existence (after learning how to love like God).
Finally, the main focus of this blog is on the evidence that NDEs provide regarding the nature of consciousness. I do not focus so much on NDE content beyond OBEs and leave that to places like IANDS. I am aware of it, but for the reason I mention above, a less focused on it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I agree, and my best shot to make sense of it is to look to dreams for parallels. In both cases, the experiencer is navigating his surroundings without senses, most notably vision. In dreams one explores the unconscious, and develops symbolic imagery. For example, an encounter with a lion in a dream might reflect some sort of anxiety/fear of some anticipated event in life. In a dream, the dreamer is the one who fully authors the experience. In an NDE, although the normal senses are lost like in a dream, other types of sense are heightened- that is the ability to experience/interact with the spiritual. In an NDE he no longer is the sole author of the experience, as other beings are interacting with him. So the NDE is sort of a hybrid environment where the NDEr makes sense of his surroundings through imaginary like in a dream, but is still interacting with others (unlike a dream).
That’s the only way I could make sense of it IMHO.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I like that. A hybrid environment. I just answered Steen on this topic with my thoughts on it. I do not think that what some NDERs report is the full picture, and that they are allowed glimpses of the greater reality that lies beyond, and in terms that they are meant to understand that glimpse.
Everything on this topic is pure speculation on subjective diverse reports, so I am not sure how much we can learn, except for core themes that come through such as love, life review, sense of being home etc. The specific descriptions are completely inconsistent except for overarching terms such as beautiful beyond description and that we do not have the language on earth to describe what they see.
LikeLike
La- !!!
It’s been a while since I responded, and I’m unsure why I got logged out. Well, at times, I question your role as a neuroscientist (if you are indeed one, you might consider covering more articles on the subject).
No need to worry, I don’t have any ill feelings towards you. However, this apparent mistake does make me wonder, “Why didn’t you notice it?”
“This has in part been demonstrated by studies of implicit learning (discussed in the manuscript).1 The use of EEG (e.g., bispectral) is an established way to detect and measure the depth of consciousness in comatose patients in the intensive care unit and during surgery. Our study extended this application to detect markers of consciousness in comatose patients undergoing CPR”.
Now, if you’re aware, comatose patients typically exhibit very low or no activity at all. The study, however, focused on comatose patients who experienced cardiac arrest.
This addresses two objections:
Concerns that certain parts of the brain might go undetected by the 4-electrode EEG or deeper brain regions.
Why? Because such activity doesn’t contribute to any conscious activity in comatose patients, as outlined in the manuscript.
Doubts about the non-invasiveness of the EEG used.
Why? An invasive EEG could measure larger brain regions, including those beneath the scalp, whereas a scalp EEG typically focuses on areas like the temporal and frontal lobes. However, the use of a scalp EEG proves effective in detecting any conscious activity in comatose patients.
Add Bruce Greyson’s comments that:
“That is, those patients who had near-death experiences did not show the reported brain waves, and those who did show the reported brain waves did not report near-death experiences,” Greyson told CNN via email.
“two of the 28 interviewed subjects had EEG data, but weren’t among those with explicit cognitive recall.”
https://edition.cnn.com/2023/09/14/health/near-death-experience-study-wellness/index.html
“All (the study) has shown is that in some patients there is continued electrical activity in the head that occurs during the same period that other patients report having NDEs (near-death experiences),” Greyson said.
It’s correct that the study was not able to match electrical activity with a near death experience in the same patient, Parnia said.
What matter’s here is, no activity whatsover was detected in such patient’s having NDE’s but the experience happened during “CPR” and the brain even after getting minimal blood flow and oxygen couldn’t give any activity really contributing to conscious experience.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hi Ujwl (is that your name?),
Not sure what you are getting at here.
Firstly I have never said I am a neuroscientist, but have worked in neuroscience as a medical scientist for about 5 years (currently I am in nephrology working as a medical scientist but may be back in neuroscience soon). My coverage of neuroscience articles in this space only extends to those that have direct relevance to NDEs, and either present a paradigm shift in understanding or claim to (the latter is more often the case than the former). I am not generally interested in incremental changes in our understanding of the minutiae of brain death.
Secondly, and again I am confused by aspects of your comments, I have covered off this subject in sufficient detail over the years. I made similar comments to Greyson on this blog long before his comments were published. I made them as soon as the paper was published and the limited details of the 28 patients was available. Also, from the paper, despite the fact that they have EEG data for 2 patients of the 28 interviewees, and that these 2 did not have NDEs, we do not know if they had EEG “activity”, so even Dr Greyson is filling in the gaps here.
As for deep brain EEG, and what might be missed, I have not covered this…it is speculative. As for covering other articles, I have limited time. I have a demanding job and have to be highly selective about what I write up here. I will be writing about the the most recent dying rat study shortly, and I have covered the coma patients and previous rat study before. THERE IS NOTHING NEW UNDER THE SUN and none of these studies provide any evidence for or against the validity of NDEs pointing to the consciousness being separate from the brain or not.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hi Ben-
Excuse my neophytic understanding of neurology, but I’ve never heard of “deep brain EEGs”. In your opinion, is the efficacy of this test greater than normative EEGs? If they are, why aren’t they used more often during CA? Forgive me for digressing from the main focus of your response.
LikeLike
I am not expert (or a neuroscientist) but have knowledge of neuroscience from working in various therapy areas that focus on neuroscience (sleep medicine, dementia and obesity – which is actually partly a neurological disease).
Implanting electrodes is used in epilepsy and in cutting edge Brain-computer interface technology (eg Musk’s neurolink) but outside of experimental or very specific neurological disease applications, this type of EEG is impractical because they would be invasive and create huge risk for patients. I believe scalp EEGs are fine for the purposes of our understanding. TBH I’m not absolutely sure what Ujwl is going on about anyway. If I filled these pages with endless posts on the details of every article published on the neuroscience of death it would bore the pants off me and everyone else.
Having said that, I will write up the recent rat study from the Paris group that was recently mentioned, and at the same time summarise the current understanding of what happens from a basic neuroscience perspective at death in terms of depolarisation etc.
LikeLike
Ok , I would just wish you come back in neuroscience again , so that I can ask you some question’s regarding some tool’s in this studie’s.
https://iands.org/research/publications/book-publications/the-self-does-not-die.html
Have you brought this book?
This provides a chapter on Aware 2 Study ,critique.
LikeLike
Sorry, I normally avoid sarcasm, but I am going struggle on this occasion.
I can’t wait to get back into neuroscience too. The moment I left my previous role in neuroscience all knowledge I had acquired on the subject and my ability to read neuroscience papers evaporated and will only return when I am back working in neuroscience.
Have you read my book? I had a critique of the first data from the AWARE II study in that 2 years ago, and had been posting it on this blog since 2015/6 and updating it whenever there were new revalation. I have just drafted some changes to include a critique of the paper of AWARE II in my latest version…based on the numerous posts I have created here.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Ben, any explanation for why atheists see shapes and colors rather than landscapes and people when having NDEs? Also, doesn’t this work against the legitimacy of NDEs? Perhaps you should write up a post covering this interesting topic.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Did I say atheists? Maybe it was. This is just from bingeing on YouTube NDEs recently. I think some are probably nonsense, but the simple fact is that no single NDE is the same, and yes it is something I am going to write about in my next book which is going to be much more focused on the relationship between NDEs and my faith, and overtly so…no sneaky slipping in a bit of Jesus here and there 😉 Way too many Christian writers are highly selective in the NDEs they chose to support their beliefs, and this diversity of experience has really got me thinking, and I will never have the answer, but I can have fun guessing. Also there is a strong challenge from some very devout Christians who have hellish experiences or come back challenged about the message from the Bible. I am trying to thread this needle.
LikeLike
Orson, Bruce Greyson has a recent article on nasty NDEs in the December 2023 Journal of Scientific Exploration. “11% and 22% of all NDEs”, he says, which seems against what Sam says? i.e. it’s all positive. For me, the message is we all should strive to be good and decent in life.
The Darker Side of Near-Death Experiences
https://journalofscientificexploration.org/index.php/jse/issue/view/97
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks for picking this up Alan. Yes, I find it very strange that Sam Parnia does not allow for the possibility that these are genuine NDEs. I will read the article shortly as very interesting…if a little gloomy.
LikeLike
And also ” cover more on this article”
https://www.academia.edu/574245/Towards_a_Cognitive_Neuroscience_of_the_Dying_Brain
LikeLike
LikeLike
There’s also a IANDS video that covers skeptics. A great watch as well. The evidence for consciousness being separate from the brain is about 50/50 with the evidence it isn’t.
LikeLike
LikeLike
I came across a study that states that in the course of a week the mean dream recall is around once a week. This is roughly 14%. This is similar to the statistics for NDE recall. However the recall is much higher- closer to 80% if the we awake and attempt to recall the dream while we were in the rem stage, which is really the time in which dreams occur. Since we dream every night as we enter REM sleep what if we speculate that REM sleep (the period in which we dream) is the same as the active part of an NDE, as in both cases there is some activity (in an nde we have some spiritual interaction going on). If you are revived during this part of an NDE, then just like in dreams 80% of the chance you may recall your NDE.
BUT, in NDES we are told to return and when we do, we may no longer be in the NDE equivalent of REM sleep – in which case recall would be less likely once revived.
Anyway, I like to think that we can learn alot about NDEs by understanding dreams.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I average around 4 recalls a week and have notebooks filled with them, I got so many I gave up writing down. Many seemingly pointless though. Said before but I had one where I died in a head-on train crash with many others and we were all taken to different destinations after in buses and cabs. So an afterlife in a dream. Again, I mentioned before, the great mathematician Alexander Grothendieck examined his dreams and said God (he called le Reveur), who knows us, sends dreams as messages, some of which are powerful and should be acted on. If we get messages in NDEs why not dreams when we’re alive? It seems pointless to just get messages when having NDEs, as normal healthy folks would be getting cut out of God’s “messaging system”.
LikeLike
It’s a really good point you made though, there has to be a connection. Can we I guess find God in dreams, for example, by kind of trying?
LikeLike
I don’t think there are anything paranormal about dreams. Medication can dramatically change sleep architecture. Mirtazapin for example will give your sleep vivid dreams you can recall every morning.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think there is something paranormal about dreams. 😉 Dream telepathy, Krippner and Ullman wrote a book on it from their experiments.
LikeLike
@Steenbundgaard, not to boast, but my dreams are always vivid. It’s like free Netflix. And I don’t take Mirtazapin. I’m told that the more creative you are, the higher chances you’ll sleep vivid dreams.
LikeLike
Hey Yitz, any insights from them?
LikeLike
I believe that much of what happens in a near-death experience is a vivid dream, more powerful because certain parts of the brain are surely activated that do not usually occur in life. The great mystery of this whole topic is out-of-body experiences.
LikeLike
That doesn’t really fit the “narrative ark” of an NDE. Person dies>OBE sees themselves on a bed>tunnel>other world stuff>return. For me the real mystery is what is happening after the OBE. It is not happening in the brain as it is nothing like a dream according to NDErs.
LikeLike
Hey Ben i think that there is a soul hidden in the conciusness, i mean look the eucharistic miracle of Buenos Aires of documentarist Ron Tesoriero that demostrated scientifically that a host transformed into living human heart muscle tissue with white blood cells that destroyed Darwin theory evolution that can prove that life was created by God.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sorry Albert, what does this mean?
LikeLike
Im looking forward to reading Parnia book Lucid Dying. I still haven’t seen when the documentry Rethinking death will be released on youtube.
LikeLike
Given the delays and ambiguities of Dr Parnia it would be interesting to understand who finances the study aware… Pim van Lommel’s study without funding has led to important results and they have been published in The Lancet, Parnia states that the brain continues to be active even up to an hour after the death of the individual and stops here, while Dr Pim van Lommel states and explains why a brain can no longer save memories when it collapses… and explains many other reasons why the brain cannot be the container of an active and coherent consciousness when it collapses. Pin Van Lommel in my humble opinion is much more complete in the exposition of his research. I don’t know if those who comment here on this blog know about near-death experiences in their entirety, but I read that for some the most significant and difficult to interpret aspect are the OBEs, well, then how do you explain that a blind person from birth suddenly begins to see? They, the blind, and they have specified it well in the stories, when they dream they are not able to reconstruct life scenes, because simply being blind from birth they are not able to do so. Also, how do you explain that people only meet deceased people? Sometimes, they meet people who they didn’t even know were dead, they only find out about it later when they return. Can this be explained? Furthermore, how do you explain that very young children return with the same memories as adults? And then and then and then….
LikeLiked by 2 people
The evidence is overwhelming, but our world chooses ignorance.
LikeLiked by 1 person
https://www.resuscitationjournal.com/article/S0300-9572(23)00237-X/fulltext
Greyson letter in realtion to Aware 2
https://www.resuscitationjournal.com/article/S0300-9572(23)00294-0/fulltext
Martial letter in realtion to Aware 2
So a propement of ndes abd a sceptical towardss ndes in philosophical views anyhow.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Thanks for finding them! Greyson is pretty blunt, and echos much of what has been said here. I think it was not very “helpful” of Parnia to bury the most important piece of data in tiny print under a figure in the final paper, after years of allowing people to speculate about whether any who had NDEs also had EEG signals. I think the way that he has gone about this and his extrapolating data which has no association with NDEs into his disinhibition theory has damaged his credibility on both sides of the divide.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Hey Ben, I haven’t had time to read the entire paper, and I may have forgot… Are you saying that there’s factual evidence in this study that there’s no EEG during NDEs and it’s just a small footnote? If so, that’s crazy! Shouldn’t that be enormous news to the scientific world?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Hi Stan,
No, I am not saying that, although Greyson intimates that. However, the precise words, and precision is important here, state that there is no EEG DATA for the patients who had NDEs, so we cannot say there was no EEG ACTIVITY as we just do not know…which is why Parnia is wrong to use this study to push his disinhibition theory.
On the flip side, the 2 patients from the 28 who were interviewed, who had EEG data, did not have any recollections. Now this is where I am again biting my tongue and trying to restrain myself with the level of disapprobation I show towards the way the study team present the results, but he does state whether or not this interpretable EEG data showed any of the markers of consciousness that he talks about in the rest of the paper. This is in my view an egregious omission, and in my darker thoughts cause me to suspect it is deliberate since it may undermine the “disinhibition” narrative if there was activity without recollection.
As I said, from December 2019, when the first results from AWARE II were presented at AHA, there has been a lack of transparency and clarity around the EEG results that has affected my attitude towards Parnia, who prior to this episode had shown himself to be a researcher of redoubtable curiosity and impeccable integrity.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Hi Ben-
Just an F.Y.I.: Parnia Lab has made public the documentary Rethinking Death: Exploring What Happens When We Die. I know some of your blog visitors were interested in watching it. Not sure if you have.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I have watched it. I know Paul Battista will be happy.
LikeLiked by 1 person
what do you think Ben?
LikeLike
I am happy Lol. Thanks Ben
LikeLiked by 3 people
The Pre-Existence of Souls? – David Bentley Hart, seems relevant. Uncreated spirit, I suppose always existing? Makes me feel old. I have a few of his books
LikeLike
Near-death experiences pass Carl Sagan’s legitimacy test. This requirement has been met thousands and thousands of times providing strong evidence for the existence of an afterlife and consciousness after death.
The book is called Brocas Brain by Carl Sagan chapter 5
There is an endless amount of evidence on this phenomenon… in a court of law it would be excessively sufficient to close the case in favor of an afterlife, the problem is that we would like this evidence to materialize into something material, visible, touchable. I have strong doubts in believing that just one tangible proof would be enough to convince people who are skeptical out of interest or bias, and reverse the tendencies of the lobbies… To convince humanity it would instead be necessary for God to appear from heaven and shout to everyone about his existence, or organized tours on a massive scale in the other dimension…. In fact, skeptics only change their minds when they go to the other side… who knows why… the fear is evident that it is ninety…
LikeLiked by 2 people
Absolutely. I make that exact same point in my book. The thing is, God is all about free choice. This life, the purpose of this life, is to choose him and if it is completely obvious beyond any doubt that God exists, then it becomes less about choice. That is my current thinking. I also think of the words “he who has let him see and he who has ears let him hear.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
This one is difficult access, mostly because of the potential language barrier. It’s an interview of Dr. Sam Parnia in Spanish television. Around the 10:26 mark, Dr. Parnia, through the Spanish translator, states that the biological markers we’ve discussed on your blog indicate that an experience (NDE) is occurring without those biological markers dictating the experience itself. He says – again through the Spanish translator – that those markers are simply an indication that the patient is experiencing a hyper-state of lucidity. In the interest of full disclosure, I will share with you that I can speak Spanish, although my vocabulary is significantly limited when it comes to writing.
I was able to access the website without any viral threats.
https://www.cuatro.com/cuarto-milenio/20240121/entrevista-sam-parnia-experiencias-cercanas-muerte_18_011488442.html
LikeLike
It sounds very similar to the response Langone Health gave me on Instagram a few moths ago.
LikeLike
I wonder if he is under some kind of pressure to say this stuff, and to force this link between the EEG signals and experiences. It makes absolutely no sense otherwise as there is no evidence of a link. The other conclusions that you could draw are not very favourable for the integrity or abilities of Dr Parnia.
LikeLike
Remember he is trying to categorise different types of experiences and that the the bio markers are just that markers. One doesn’t look at a fm radio see the station is on 95.5 fm and say that the cause of radio waves, merely a indication.
LikeLike
Hi Z, it is rare if ever that I disagree with you, but the issue here is that there are no recollections of experiences with EEG data let alone EEG data suggestive of consciousness. There is no association. So what he is saying is speculative hypothesis at best, but in reality extremely misleading in that he states it is as though it is fact. I have worked in science all my life, and I find this kind of misrepresentation of the facts an egregious act of manipulation.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ben- To have a more focused view on where he stands, let me try and summarize the most compelling assertions made by Dr. Parnia in recent times (as best as I can recall):
1) He has stated that he sides with the group of scientists who believe the brain does not create consciousness.
2) In this most recent interview and in the response given to me by Langone Health on Instagram, they mentioned that the biomarkers are detecting a conscious experience (NDE) but that they are not necessarily dictating the experience itself.
3) If you were to quantify the content of the statements Dr. Parnia has made in various media, despite the contradictory and nebulous nature of some of these statements, there is a perceivable bend towards non-materialistic explanations for the existence consciousness. True, the ambiguity of some of these statements can’t simply be dismissed, especially from a scientific consideration.
From my perspective, he seems to be a hodgepodge of pros and cons, with non-materialistic viewpoints advancing over materialistic ones. I will withhold judgment of Dr. Parnia for now – not that I have avoided doing so in the past – and wait for wonderful future opportunities for him to exasperate me.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I understand your sentiment, and agree that his claims lie on the dualist side, but precision and factual substantiation are important when making grand claims in science and both of those are lacking in this instance, and actually threaten to undermine his dualist position if exposed as wrong. I suspect he is hedging his bets, and getting ahead of the materialist mob, and using their tactics. I am not of that disposition.
I think for now I have said all I should as I don’t want to argue with friends. My last word on this though is to refer you and others to what Van Lommel and Greyson say in their letter. Their language may be more polite and professional due to the context but, is nonetheless as critical as it gets in science, and says pretty much the same that I do. For many years they have worked alongside Parnia as an esteemed colleague in the field, and yet now they feel it is important to publicly reprimand him for unfounded assertions. That is pretty heavy stuff.
LikeLiked by 3 people
You’re point does not go unnoticed, believe me. And Dr. Greyson is a trustworthy and respectable scientist with decades of experience in analyzing NDEs. A number of years ago, before he surged in notoriety, I emailed him and managed to get a response. He stated that while he was retiring from his position as professor that he intended to continue his research into NDEs. As far as Dr. Parnia goes, my softer approach to him is born solely out of goodwill, and quite different from yours where one is inundated in science and evidence-based conclusions, exactitude and semantics matter. Ultimately it’s the science that prevails, not goodwill.
Dr. Greyson’s most recent interview is from December 13th of last year. I’m hesitant to include a link to it since it was conducted somewhat embarrassingly unprofessionally. The interview lacked decorum and contained randomized use expletives by the host, including asking the 77 year old physician what his pronouns were. If you are interested, I can most assuredly supply you with the link.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Well put. I have a huge store of goodwill towards Parnia, but each time he comes out with one of these interviews making spurious claims, that store depletes a little.
I think if someone asked me what my pronouns were in an interview there might be a few expletives! Dr is my pronoun! Unfortunately I live in the corporate world and it is full of HR busybodies who seem to have taken over the business with fashionable ideologies that only cause division rather than creating inclusive environments.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That fair. I suppose I looking at it in line with the 2 REDs mentioned in the paper too which had no biomarkers as well. The most deepest ndes (thT of the REDs) had no biomarksrs. But it seemed the less deep ndes did. I suppose I can see parnia is trying to building a hypothesis of varying degrees of nde types.
As an aside ultimate science as a tool can only take us so far into areas which it not equipped for and the empirical nature of science had to give way to the philosophical tool of rationalism.
LikeLike
Hi Z, don’t want to appear argumentative, but just curious where you got the idea that the less deep NDEs did have bio markers. There is nothing in the paper that suggests that. The 2 subjects with EEG data (and we don’t know if it was activity or isoelectric because we are not told) did not have any recollections, so there was no recollection of anything remotely NDEish.
This is the thing…you are one of the most knowledgeable commenters on this forum and it seem that even you are being hoodwinked by this stuff (along with scientific journalists) and the more this happens and the more he perpetuates this misinformation campaign, the angrier I get. The truth is everything!
LikeLike
Perhaps i trying to connect the dots amd not doing it correctly.
But snippets from aware 2
Four categories of experiences emerged: 1) emergence from coma during CPR (CPR-induced consciousness [CPRIC]) 2/28(7.1%), or 2) in the post-resuscitation period 2/28(7.1%), 3) dream-like experiences 3/28(10.7%), 4) transcendent recalled experience of death (RED) 6/28(21.4%).
Despite marked cerebral ischemia (Mean rSO2 = 43%) normal EEG activity (delta, theta and alpha) consistent with consciousness emerged as long as 35–60 minutes into CPR.
Consciousness. awareness and cognitive processes may occur during CA. The emergence of normal EEG may reflect a resumption of a network-level of cognitive activity, and a biomarker of consciousness, lucidity and RED (authentic “near-death” experiences).
From the above with the footnote regarding 2 out of 28 had EEG but no experiences would indicate that when eeg does return it be a bimarker of consciousness sorting of integrating with the brain again.
That the way I am viewing the data although I could be very wrong.
Perhaps more clarification will come in the book in August or maybe if you ever get an interview for the blog (here’s hoping).
And you mentioned argument amongst friends. I find without proper argument in an intellectual manner (as opposed to.a emotive manner) there is no progress on matters so water off a ducks back and all that 😀 .
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hi Z,
The footnote stating that out of the 28 subjects interviewed only 2 had EEG data but had no conscious recollections, does not allow us to conclude anything at all. Firstly EEG data does not necessarily mean EEG activity. Secondly, even if there was EEG activity we are not told whether this activity was consistent with consciousness.
It is perfectly acceptable to speculate that conscious awareness may occur during CA given that some of the EEG data may have been consistent with consciousness, but to assert that this is evidence of his disinhibition theory is a aside stretch, then to say that this is actually what is going on is wrong.
There is a difference between results being hypothesis generating and proving or confirming a hypothesis…Parnia is adopting the latter stance, when the best he should really be doing is the former.
LikeLike
One thing that is required but not really getting is more specific questions from media sources as opposed to open ended ones leading to more ambiguity. Open ended questions have a place but are needed in tangent with precise ones.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I agree. He has ignored my emails for years…in fact ever since I started asking questions after the AHA 2019 presentation. No chance whatsoever of him agreeing to an interview with me I suspect. Could try though.
LikeLike
Ben- If you jog your memory, you will recall that my chief complaint about interviews involving Dr. Parnia has been the lack of depth, almost perfunctory qualities of these interviews. Extremely frustrating. I can forgive the lack of technical knowledge on behalf of the host, but the main deficiency, in my opinion, seems to be a lack of sincere interest in this subject matter – which baffles me – when you consider the inescapable fate of us all. Last year, Dr. Parnia was interviewed by a podcaster who conducted the interview so maladroitly that I had stop listening.
As far as he not answering your emails, I think fame in this niche may complicate his ability to do so. He’s probably bombarded with request for interviews by media outlets, podcasters, vloggers and bloggers, and by the masses with enquiries into their own mortality or who are seeking comforting reassurance after having lost a loved one. He also has a full time position that undoubtedly consumes the bulk of his time. It would bring me joy beyond measure, however, if he allowed you to interview him or, at the very least, responded to your emails. I’m not trying to sound pretentious, but about ten or twelve years ago (maybe longer) I reached out to him and inquired about the status of the AWARE study and how it was progressing. Much to my surprise, he responded. It was a very brief response but, nonetheless, a response. A few weeks ago I sent him an email and so far nothing. Please continue with your efforts.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I hope Dr. Parnia agrees to an interview. He tres to stay neutral I think
LikeLiked by 1 person
Are you familiar with BICS (Bigelow Institute for Consciousness Studies)? In 2022 a type of essay contest was organized by this establishment and participants were to submit in essay form their most compelling evidence for postmortem survival of consciousness. All participants had to have extensive involvement in this field of research. Dr. Parnia submitted an essay, and while not claiming the top prize, he and his team were recognized for their entry. Below is the conclusion from his essay. I venture to say that Dr. Parnia, to this day, stands by what he wrote with little to no modifications. But you never know!
‘Scientific advances have increasingly challenged societal views regarding death. While understanding what happens when we die remains a mystery, however, it is now amenable to objective scientific scrutiny. Based on the balance of probabilities and the evidence to date, it is proposed that the entity referred to as “consciousness”, “psyche” or the “self”, does not become annihilated; but instead continues after permanent death. As demonstrated in this essay, evidence to support this comes from several sources. Firstly, recalled experiences of death are incompatible with “unreal” experiences. Instead, indirect scientific studies indicate they share consistent features with “real” experiences. Second, are the weight of testimonies and paradoxical claims of consciousness and external visual awareness by an estimated 800-850 million people in relation to death, that have been confirmed by at least one large scale cardiac arrest study. This is when the brain is at best severely disordered, or nonfunctional. Third, although the time taken for brain cells to become irreversibly damaged and “permanently die” in a cadaver during the post-mortem period can last hours to days, however, the brain as an organ loses function within seconds of the heart stopping. Thus, if vital aspects of consciousness continue fully in this early phase of death, then it is unlikely that they will become annihilated later since the brain itself remains non-functional. Overall, these results favor the notion that human consciousness may be a separate, undiscovered scientific entity to the underlying brain processes and can survive beyond death. While, more future studies are needed, clearly, the recalled experience surrounding death now merits further genuine empirical investigation without prejudice.’
https://www.bigelowinstitute.org/index.php/essay-contest/
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hi Thomas,
Thanks. Yes, we discussed that here. We have no doubt that Parnia is a dualist in his outlook and that is a good thing.
LikeLiked by 1 person
New paper here (Fritz et. al. 2024) on similarities between NDEs and drug experiences. Mentions Parnia 2023 paper once but not disinhibition. But if disinhibition works as a model (generally spoken of/agreed on?) for drug experiences and we have similarities … ?
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/377188264_Bridging_the_gap_Atypical_psychedelic_and_near-death_experience_insights
Parnia Lab on disinhibition (2023)
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hi Alan,
Great find. I will write this one up. I nearly ended up being offered a job in psychedelic research recently, on the clinical side of its use obviously. Disappointed not to get it, although I would never have discussed my work on here, it would have been interesting to learn more about the subjective aspects of treatment.
LikeLike
Ok! Looking forward to your commentary.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yep, will also do a brief commentary on the recent rat study. I have a bit of time on my hands at the moment. Will be doing some novel writing too 🙂
LikeLike
Also, thanks for reminding of that video. This is what Parnia is stating as fact in his video and publicly without evidence showing it as fact. It is not scientific or professional.
LikeLike
Hi Ben im totally new to all of this and I recently found your blog .
What is a “dualist”? i tried googling it and cant understand the definition.
Thanks, enjoying your posts !
LikeLiked by 1 person
A dualist is someone who believes in the duality of existence, and that the brain and consciousness are separate entities.
LikeLike
I am Spanish and I will try to make a compilation of the most fundamental things that Parnia says in the program indicated above (Fourth Millennium/Cuarto Milenio en español) (from my point of view):
“What we have been able to show is that, as you would expect, when your heart stops and you suffer a near-death experience, your brain stops working. Curiously, even up to an hour after resuscitation we detected signs of brain electrical activity, but Now we have discovered that it is not just any activity, but the same type that registers your brain or mine at this moment, while you are interviewing me.
“They are the signals that a brain generates when it functions consciously and lucidly, such as when we remember things or concentrate”
“We have been wrongly taught that the brain dies within 5-10 minutes without oxygen and this has a very profound negative consequence, attempts to resuscitate the patient are interrupted because it is assumed that the brain will die shortly after. The pharmaceutical industry “do not investigate further”
“Our study shows that although the brain stops functioning, it does not die, but rather hibernates. In fact, it can show signs of recovery. Even an hour later”
“A consequence of this is that science has already surpassed the limits of death. We are exploring what happens in that new frontier that is beyond the threshold. And what we are finding is that what makes us what we are, “Our consciousness, our individuality, is not annihilated when we pierce that veil. On the contrary, we develop a new experience, which prepares us for what seems to come next.”
“These experiences occur when the patient approaches death, this does not occur when we are conscious, but at the moment we begin to go away. Another moment in which it can happen is just when the heart has stopped. In fact in our study we were able to identify a marker in the brain, a kind of indicator, that shows us that this experience is occurring, without this implying that the brain produces it, it is simply a sign that the patient is going through a hyper lucid and hyper state. conscious until an hour after his heart has stopped, which is the period of time we were able to measure.”
He also indicates that the experiences are similar but what changes is the interpretation, a religious person who encounters a being of light believes he has seen Jesus Christ, another person who is not religious will tell you about seeing a beautiful, loving being. luminous, kind and compassionate who helped him review his entire life. They have seen the same being but they interpret it in their own way
LikeLiked by 1 person
Good post Anthony. Back of the net IMO.
Best Paul
LikeLike
Thanks Anthony. He is repeating what he has said before. I won’t repeat my objections.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Cardiochirurgo, il Dr Lloyd Rudy, pioniere della cardiochirurgia, e la sua equipe si accorgono di una presenza durante un’operazione a cuore aperto, non vuole subito ammetterlo…ma poi dopo la spinta dell’intervistatore ammette che sentiva fosse la presenza di Dio, dice “esiste qualcosa la fuori ed è qualcosa che va oltre la nostra immaginazione”.
https://youtu.be/JL1oDuvQR08?si=o6WNv5uLjc1q3QdM
LikeLike
Hi, could our please repost this in English. I have to moderate what goes on here, and as much as I would love to speak Spanish, I do not. Also the video says unavailable. Cheers!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Even if it says the video is not available, click on the video anyway, it will send you to the video on YouTube. There must be some problem addressing the video
LikeLiked by 2 people
Cardiac surgeon, Dr Lloyd Rudy, pioneer of cardiac surgery, and his team notice a presence during an open heart operation, he does not immediately want to admit it… but then after the interviewer’s push he admits that he felt it was the presence of God, he says “there is something out there and it is something beyond our imagination.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JL1oDuvQR08
LikeLiked by 1 person
Dr Rudy’s interview is golden. Just such a modest but intelligent man, and the context is dentistry! Pure gold.
LikeLiked by 1 person
This story is very powerful, told by a doctor who lived it firsthand in every sense, Dr Mark McDonough had a near-death experience during his surgery, he was in great pain due to the burns on his body, but as if that wasn’t enough the anesthesia had paralyzed his body but he could feel everything… so it was then that he asked God for help with all his being, he instantly saw himself outside his body and felt the light reassure him, furthermore he saw his brother and his mother who had died in the fire, he also saw his grandfather who he didn’t expect to see as he had died many years before. The embrace of the light was so powerful that he managed to find the strength to survive despite the difficulties you will hear in the video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sv0ZPnXU-9E
LikeLiked by 1 person
very strong experience, with a huge emotional impact, the doctor himself is visibly moved when talking about it. Our brain must be very good at telling us emotions like these, an excellent director no doubt about it… and to think that in those moments he is in the worst conditions he can find himself in. Clearly it is sarcasm… it cannot be a brain that transmits such strength and creates contexts and situations, dialogues with such realistic interlocutors.
LikeLike
è stato detto, i sordi udiranno, i paralitici cammineranno, i CIECHI VEDRANNO….:
la dottoressa Elisabeth Kubler Ross ha documentato altre esperienze simili durante il suo lungo periodo di ricerca, come molti altri medici scienziati e ricercatori.
Le evidenze sono da tutte le parti, sta veramente succedendo qualcosa che va oltre la nostra comprensione allargandoci notevolmente il campo di visione della realtà.
Nel primo commento troverete l’esperienza raccontata proprio da Vicky Noratuk.
LikeLike
it has been said, the deaf will hear, the paralytic will walk, the BLIND will SEE….:
Dr. Elisabeth Kubler Ross has documented other similar experiences during her long period of research, as have many other medical scientists and researchers.
The evidence is everywhere, something is really happening that goes beyond our understanding, significantly broadening our field of vision of reality.
In the first comment you will find the experience told by Vicky Noratuk.
LikeLiked by 1 person
LikeLiked by 2 people
Great finds, thanks for posting them. Some really interesting comments from Vicki in both videos, that were never mentioned in Ring’s paper on the blind.
I’m not in the least bit religious, but I have studied the Gospel of Thomas for many years, and I find very deep wisdom hidden within it. When I hear Vicki’s comments, I’m reminded of many sayings in GoT, but particularly saying 83*:
Jesus said, “The images are manifest to man, but the light in them remains concealed in the image of the light of the father. He will become manifest, but his image will remain concealed by his light.”
*Lambdin translation
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Jesus said: The images are manifest to man, but the light in them remains concealed in the image of the light of the father. He will become manifest, but his image will remain concealed by his light.” incredible, more than 2000 years ago…
LikeLiked by 1 person
This interview deserves to be listened to word for word, it’s long, yes, but serious things must be addressed with patience and seriousness. The experience recounted in the video features scientist physicist Nancy Rynes (ex atheist) as the protagonist. Nancy recounts her experience in detail, the interview flows linearly and the concepts that manage to convey are very clear and strongly coherent. In telling her story, she also tells how some of her “scientist” colleagues, while others were not, then distanced themselves from her and how she was not at all worried about this, she feels sorry for them as the continuation of life it’s a real fact and therefore the problem is more theirs than his. He also told his experience to Dr Parnia, with whom he had an exchange of opinions on the technical-scientific side of NDEs and his personal experience. This scientist’s experience further helped give me very solid answers to some of my questions.
LikeLike
I think I’ve seen this one, but thanks for posting. There are lots of good NDE videos out there.
LikeLike
Dr Pim van Lommel published a much appreciated study in The Lancet on clinically dead and then resuscitated patients who had had near-death experiences. In the recent interview, the studies of other researchers like him are also mentioned (Dr Parnia, Dr Greyson, Dr Fenwich etc. etc. from whom he received further confirmations). Today, after many years of research, he is certain: „Death is only the end of our body, not of our consciousness“ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKnaTKih20A
LikeLiked by 1 person
Got round to watching it. Fantastic interview with a great man. I like his theory about the reason why people are less likely to have an NDE as they get older. It is original and much more palatable than my death of the soul explanation. It just boggles my mind that so few people take this stuff seriously when such an intelligent, knowledgeable human being states these things with such authority.
LikeLike
SKEPTIC PROOF…. For subtitles in the video: select the settings icon – a small gear to the right of the subtitles – and select “Subtitles”. A window will open, go to “Auto Translation” and select the English language.
LikeLike
I can’t seem to translate it to english. Theres no icon for language that I can find.
LikeLike