AwareofAware

Evolving news on the science, writing and thinking about Near Death Experiences (NDEs)

Archive for the tag “Aware study”

19 Nov 2025
41 Comments

Believe it or not.

Apologies for the delay in creating this post, but I recently moved from the UK to New Zealand, starting a new job at the same time, so I have been somewhat distracted!

As the eternal hunt for a scientifically validated OBE in an NDE continues (slowly), and the realisation dawns on researchers that it may be many years before such an event occurs, the community is required to continue to rely on human validation. This paper is an attempt to create a tool that seeks to objectively measure the reliability of these “humanly verified” NDEs. Thanks Paul for alerting us to this article

Scale Construction

The development of the vNDE evidential strength scale followed the Delphi Method using feedback from a panel of experts. The process involved circulating a draft scale among 11 experts for review and revision in two rounds, allowing time for detailed input and fostering consensus. Initially, the scale covered seven criteria; after expert discussion and consensus (80% agreement), the final version included eight well-defined criteria, each designed to rigorously assess aspects of the near-death experience and its verification.

Scale Criteria

The final scale contains eight items, covering critical aspects such as the timing of the investigation, the experiencer’s physical and medical state, the occurrence of cardiac or respiratory arrest, the degree of third-person verification, possibility of sensory explanations, the number of verified and erroneous perceptions, and the clarity of recalled perceptions. For each criterion, evaluators are required to provide both a rating and a written justification, lending qualitative depth to the scoring process.

Scale Scoring

Scores from each of the eight items are summed, resulting in a total between 0 and 32. This total score is then mapped to one of four predetermined levels of evidential strength (very low, low, moderate, or strong) aligned with the quartiles of possible scores. The highest tier, “strong,” requires not only a high total score but also a high rating in third-person verification, ensuring robust evidential support.

Scale Validation

The vNDE Scale was validated by having 13 experts and three AI language models (ChatGPT v.4, Gemini Pro, and Mistral Medium 3) independently apply it to 17 potential veridical near-death experiences (vpNDEs) detailed in nine peer-reviewed papers (most people would be familiar with these cases that have been discussed here and on the web extensively). The selection of cases was based on strict inclusion criteria, ensuring each paper provided sufficient detail and had undergone peer review. AI raters were included to assess the feasibility of automating the scale’s application and to help counterbalance possible human biases, particularly where personal beliefs could influence scoring. Out of 13 experts, 11 completed the evaluations (with two collaborating on a joint response), while the AI models followed a standardised prompt to apply the scale to each case using the relevant sections of the papers.

My thoughts

In summary the vNDE scale they created had 8 different evidential criteria, each with their own rating scale (from 1-4), which contributed to an overall score (max 32) reflecting the quality of the evidence supporting the veracity of the OBE within an NDE.

Given the baseline requirement of the cases being presented in peer reviewed journals, and also the requirement for an independent witness, the quality is already higher than many. However, this scale refines things further to determine if the sum of evidence reported and presented is strong or not in relation to the NDE being reliable evidence of an independent consciousness or not.

Below is the kind of output that was generated:

What is notable is that in the majority of cases a consensus of specific strength was not reached (e.g. strong vs moderate). However when adjacent levels were considered (e.g. strong or moderate), things improved. There was reasonable consensus within the AI models, and between AI and humans, although some wild discrepancies as well.

Given the fact that the tool failed to create consistent precise consensus between the expert assessors, it is clear that the ability to quantify the levels of strength is not quite objective enough, and allows for subjective inter-assessor interpretation. It also shows (once again) that AI while promising, cannot be fully relied upon to replace humans, even for a task that it should be ideally qualified to perform.

Having said that, in the absence of an OBE verified using electronic equipment like in AWARE II, this is about as good as it gets for now. Further refinement of this tool creating better alignment between expert assessors will no doubt lead to a fully validated tool that can be incorporated in future research.  

The other outcome of this study is the fact that AI and the expert panel agreed that the three top cases in the table above had strong evidence to support the validity of the OBEs. We should bank that for now and use these three as exemplary examples of well documented OBEs with third party witnesses. I am glad that the AWARE I OBE is in this group.

Lastly I just wanted to cover a recent poster presented by the Parnia lab at AHA recently (thanks Z). It is somewhat related to the previous article, so worth shoving in here:

Summary of Abstract:

Background: About 10% of cardiac arrest survivors experience vivid Recalled Experiences of Death (RED) marked by clear awareness and a sense of life review, which can enhance quality of life. Although often dismissed as hallucinations or dreams, this study uses Natural Language Processing (NLP) to objectively distinguish RED from dreams and drug-induced states.

Hypothesis: NLP can differentiate RED accounts in cardiac arrest patients from other altered states based on thematic content, informing our understanding of consciousness during clinical death.

Methods: Researchers analyzed 3,700 anonymized first-person narratives: 1,245 RED, 1,190 dream, and 1,265 drug-induced reports, using keyword filtering and transformer-based models (Longformer for narrative classification; BERT for RED theme identification).

Results: The Longformer model achieved 98% validation F1-score and 100% holdout accuracy, accurately classifying all holdout drug narratives without needing substance names. The BERT model identified RED-specific themes with 90% validation and 87% holdout F1-scores.

Conclusion: Transformer-based NLP can effectively distinguish RED from other experiences, revealing distinct and structured patterns, and providing an objective method for analyzing survivor narratives and related psychological outcomes.

My Interpretation

Parnia’s utilisation of artificial intelligence to analyse the narrative content of two distinct types of experiences—Recalled Experiences of Death (RED) and those induced by drugs or dreams—demonstrates that AI is capable of reliably distinguishing between authentic near-death experiences and other altered states. Although the outcomes are inherently influenced by the subjective prompts provided to the AI models, the findings nonetheless reinforce the view that REDs are unique and fundamentally different in character from both “natural” and “artificial” hallucinations or experiences.

Moreover, this approach contributes to the development of more objective methodologies for differentiating between these reports. By leveraging AI as a tool for analysis, it becomes possible to more clearly separate genuine REDs from other experiences, supporting the argument that these phenomena possess distinguishing features that set them apart from ordinary dreams or drug-induced perceptions.

As always, if you haven’t already, please buy one of my books:

Posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , , ,
29 May 2025
284 Comments

AWARE IIIa results

Firstly, thanks to Peter for bringing this to my attention. It was published a couple of days ago:

I have called this study AWARE IIIa as it is latest in a sequence of studies involving Sam Parnia (don’t think there is a formal name for this study at the moment). The first author is Joshua Ross, a resident physician at NYU Langone, and Parnia is the last-named author. First and last names on a publication are always considered the principal players in the study.

I call it IIIa because it is a pilot study looking at the feasibility of a larger potential study looking into consciousness during deep hypothermic circulatory arrest (DHCA). We have been waiting for something from this for a while now, especially as I have noted previously that recruitment started summer 2020. This paper confirms that and reports on patients recruited from 7/20 to 1/22 from 10 hospitals. It was funded by NYU and the Templeton foundation.

The idea of a study like this has been bouncing around for a while now. One of the most famous NDEs ever, Pam Reynolds, occurred during DHCA. The patient’s heart is stopped slowly under controlled conditions by cooling the body to less than 20 °C, surgery is performed, usually within 1 hour, then the body slowly warmed and the heart restarted. It is now a relatively routine procedure for types of surgery where stopping blood flow is important.

Given that the heart stops – cardiac arrest or CA – this has often been regarded as a possible model for NDEs under controlled conditions with the massive advantage that patients survive (only about 10-20% of in-hospital CAs survive to discharge). Given that patients undergoing DHCA have actually reported NDEs (or REDs), exploring this further made a lot of sense, and I was previously very excited about such a study. However, despite some early positive data from the Montreal study led by Beauregard, a more recent study showed no NDEs in a cohort of DHCA patients (HCA study from 2021). This led to me being a bit skeptical about a DHCA study producing a hit. My thinking was that maybe the patient had to be conscious prior to CA, and for the experience to be sudden for the consciousness to be “jolted out of the brain” or to allow disinhibition to occur, as Parnia would say.

Anyway, on to the study:

Design: feasibility study using similar equipment to that deployed in AWARE II – namely an ipad with images only visible from above and earbuds repeating words, as well as EEG and oximetry equipment. All of this would obviously be in place prior to CA, a huge advantage to AWARE II, as would patient consent be.

Results: Remember this is only a pilot to establish methodology, so the numbers were small:

  • 35 post procedure interviews
  • No explicit recall of images or words (3 fruits) – i.e. no one remembered seeing the images or hearing the words during the procedure
  • 1 NDE/RED experience, but without an OBE
  • 2 patients had recollections more consistent with CPRIC or ICU delirium
  • 3 patients (8.6%) were able to guess the fruits correctly – the authors suggests this may imply implicit recall (i.e. they heard it, subconsciously recorded hearing it, but don’t remember hearing), I think this is a big stretch, something they acknowledge as well, as I will explain below
  • Cerebral activity showed 70% of patient brains were isoelectric (no activity) during DHCA with about 30% having delta waves

My initial response to this was disappointment as once again we have a study without a hit, but on reflecting overnight on it, I am not so discouraged. Why is that?

Once again the numbers were small. Only 35 were interviewed. Now if these were CAs that occurred in an ICU or ER and were sudden as with most NDEs, you would expect 3-6 NDE/RED reports, but there is only one. If my thinking outlined above is correct – namely that a sudden/unexpected cessation of heartbeat while conscious is normally required for the consciousness to “untether” then you would either expect no NDEs from a DHCA study, or a much lower incidence. That may be why we only see one RED (although that is one more than was seen in the 2021 study).

Given that that there was only one reported RED (i.e. an experience meeting the stricter criteria outlined in the 2022 consensus statement – something I am leaning to much more given some of the physicalist’s adoption of the term NDE to describe all kinds of non-classical NDE events) and that normally only 20-25% of people who have a RED report an OBE (in this dimension at least), then you would not expect an OBE, especially one that noticed the screen.

As for guessing the fruits – banana, apple, pear – I suspect that if you asked 100 people to randomly name the first 3 fruits that came into their heads maybe 5-10% would come up with this combination. If it had been Apple, Banana orange it would probably be 30%. Anyway, the authors acknowledge that not too much should be made of this finding as chance may play a part. (they need to change the words and images for future studies as people familiar with these studies may taint the results)

Sceptics may argue that I am clutching at straws by remaining positive here, and they may be right, but if this had been a study with 10 times the number of patients, and there had been no NDEs with OBEs, then I might agree. As it is, I think my position is rational, if on the optimistic side.

In conclusion (from our perspective), while there was no OBE with explicit recall of images, given the 1 RED, this DHCA pilot study hints at the possibility of using DHCAs as a better method for exploring consciousness during CA, and specifically REDs. However, accounting for the possibility of a lower prevalence of REDs from this procedure than that seen in the unplanned CA population, much larger numbers may be needed. Hopefully they carried on with collecting data after January 2022 and we won’t have to wait another 5 years! Moreover, I hope they are continuing collecting data for AWARE II since it is still possible DHCAs may prove a dead end.

Parnia continues to lead the way in research into consciousness during CA. He is genuinely an outstanding researcher in this field and I hope that one day his labor and perseverance will be rewarded. All power to Parnia!

Finally, if you haven’t already, please visit this site which has my books on NDEs etc and feel free to buy one! If you read a book, liked it but not yet reviewed/rated it, then please do so. Finally I am in process of creating audiobook versions of some of the books which will be available later in June.

Posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , ,
18 Jul 2024
39 Comments

Gamma garbage

Firstly, I apologise (not for the first time!) about the long wait between posts. I have been working on my novel and a new non-fiction project. Both are now at copy-editing phase, so hopefully mid Fall will see me put them on Amazon.

Secondly, I apologise for not making this post about psychedelics. It is something that is coming, but requires reviewing a whole number of papers, and so is quite a bit of work. Probably be late August when I get round to it. But for now, this paper really piqued my interest.

I was sent a link to it by Ian – thank you. It is a comprehensive and detailed review of the evidence relating to the proposition that gamma band activity (GBA) either before CA (peri-CA) in patients or animals in a coma, or up to 30 seconds post CA in rats, and up to an hour post CA in patients receiving CPR, could account for Near Death experiences.

This proposal, that GBA provides evidence that elements of the NDE are generated in the brain, have been most vocally promoted by Borjigin and other materialists.  Parnia has repeatedly claimed that the GBA observed in patients undergoing CPR could be associated with an NDE (even if they haven’t been), but unlikely to be the cause. He suggests it is a sign of the consciousness accessing different dimensions. I have already produced countless words here explaining why neither of these claims is with serious foundation. Firstly, there were no reports of conscious recollection in any of the cases where GBA was observed, secondly, even if there were, association is not causation, but since we don’t even have association, the claims are just researchers trying to get attention…it’s what they do.

Anyway, that’s the back story. Something that has never been entirely clear to me in all of this is the “so what” of observing GBA. When you do a bit of research, it is clear that there is a consensus that Gamma activity on an EEG is associated with consciousness. Questions around strength of signal and precisely which wavelengths etc are most closely associated with conscious activity remain unanswered. This paper goes a long way towards answering some of these questions and discounting the idea that these transient episodes of GBA around the time of death could be evidence that the brain is producing the complex narratives that come out of NDEs.

It is a highly detailed paper, and not the easiest to read, however these are the key take-aways I got from it:

1. The link between gamma waves and consciousness, or states of awareness, has not been proven. It is strongly suspected to be the case, but due to the fact that gamma waves are somewhat ubiquitous, it cannot be stated with certainty that they are definitely linked, and less so in what way. For example:

    The authors formally analyzed the absolute and relative power of GBA for both wakefulness and ketamine-xylazine anesthesia. For absolute power, little difference could be detected between the conscious and unconscious states for any of the four GBA subbands. Regarding relative power, there was a tendency for activity to increase during the waking period, but only in the medium and higher gamma bands. Such findings do not resolve the relationship between GBA and the level of arousal.

    2. Not only has the link between gamma and conscious awareness not been proven, but there is evidence from research into psychedelics and “NDE-like” experiences, that gamma is less prominent:

    What was discovered was the dominance of slow delta and theta oscillations was accompanied by a striking loss of spectral power in the faster rhythms. Such findings are, of course, quite contrary to the expectations of the GBA model. Assuming that the high-frequency burst of activity is actually associated with the induction of an NDE, it would be predicted that fast oscillations underlie the action of an agent such as DMT. This is strong implicit evidence that the surge in GBA at the moment of death is unlikely to be responsible for NDE.

    3. The anatomical source of GBA around the time of death is not clear, especially post CA. For example, muscles produce gamma waves. Many of these studies claim to account for that, but there are inherent problems with capturing these signals, especially when using electrodes attached to the surface of the scalp. The GBA signals being picked up could be coming from almost anywhere, especially in the absence of other strong signals.

    The more the GBA has been contaminated by artifacts, the less likely it is to fulfill its purported role as a kind of neural blueprint for NDE. It is a concern that those who propose a link between GBA and NDE choose to turn a proverbial blind eye to such a potential flaw or weakness in their argument.

    This argument applies much less so in the coma patient’s peri-CA. In those patients (who are still alive incidentally – see my last post) the GBA is almost certainly from the brain, but exactly what it relates to is a subject of pure speculation. Moreover, while it is assumed that EEG activity is coming from the cortex, it is possible it is coming from the amygdala, as various experiments have previously shown.

    These intermittent oscillatory emissions or signals arise in the basolateral amygdala (BLA) and consist of spindle-like bursts of high-frequency high-amplitude activity, typically lasting from seconds to minutes. They are endogenous but not strictly spontaneous because they can be evoked by a variety of stimuli. These included states of arousal, threat, learning, emotion, fear, stress, anticipation, pain, and noise. It might be predicted therefore, conditions such as hypoxia, ischemia, or cardiac arrest would provide an optimal milieu for the enhancement and/or appearance of the BLA rhythm. Nonetheless, it is in no way implied that these amygdaloid oscillations recorded from the cortex possess any mystical or psychedelic properties and, therefore, could be responsible for the NDE.

    This very much echoes what I said in the video I made in the previous post, namely that instinctive and involuntary reactions to a state of hypoxia would probably cause parts of the brain responsible for fright and flight to light up and send signals out to get the body to move and start breathing again. This seems like the most likely explanation for any brain activity. It is desperately trying to resolve the threat. This is classic Ockham’s razor territory, something that the author states in his conclusions:

    The present re-interpretation of the significance of the surges in GBA is obviously somewhat routine and quotidian, especially when compared with the more exotic, intriguing, and tantalizing alternative. It is unlikely to attract the same amount of attention from media. Nonetheless, it has the virtue of being parsimonious. As Ockham’s principle reminds us, simplicity is often a useful guide for scientific truth.

    I also believe this is the most likely explanation of what we are seeing in Parnia’s CPR patients. Just enough blood is reaching the brain to cause primitive emergency responses to the state it is in.

    In summary, the relationship between GBA and conscious awareness has not been fully established, and most definitely not characterised…in other words we cannot be certain that GBA and conscious awareness are linked, and even if we were, we don’t know how. Moreover, there is evidence from psychedelics that GBA is not associated with transcendental experiences with similar characteristics to NDEs. Finally, the anatomical source of the GBA in these studies may not be the cortex, but somewhere else, and more likely physiological in nature rather than of the kind of brain activity that would produce complex memories like NDEs.

    So, whenever you hear about GBA being related to NDEs you will now know that the observation is meaningless regarding connection to or explanation of the phenomenon even if there was an associated NDE…which there never has been!

    Aiming for an August post about psychedelics 😊

    Posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , ,
    02 Apr 2024
    40 Comments

    Media Manipulation – The Guardian

    I am in the process of writing my piece on Psychedelics, but today the Guardian followed up its recent interview with Sam Parnia, with this, and I decided it was worth addressing since your friends and family may bring it up (my mother has already!). The Psychedelics article is coming…promise!

    This article starts out with a fairly balanced account of how the field of NDE research evolved. It lulls you into a false sense of security that the balance will continue, but whenever you read the name Borjigin referred to in terms of progress in understanding, then you know that balance is likely to evaporate very quickly.

    My previous post relates to the kind of work that Borjigin does, and the data that she has produced. In summary, and for the umpteenth time, Borjigin and others have shown that in rats brains activity can persist for maybe up to a minute after death without CPR. The studies in human coma patients have shown that immediately prior to death, and immediately after life support is withdrawn, coma patients have a number of minutes in which the brain produces EEG data that might be associated with consciousness. Moreover, Parnia’s own data has shown that the brain is capable of producing activity that might be associated with consciousness up to an hour after CA but while CPR is being administered and therefore while there is still oxygenated blood flow to the brain. I have explained ad nauseum here why this data, while interesting, says absolutely nothing at all about NDEs since no NDE has to date been reported that could even be associated with, let alone correlated with EEG activity. Nothing. Using the coma patients is particularly egregious since the patients had no reported EEG activity after death.

    However, because of the profile of the Guardian, and the bias that emerges towards the end of this article, it is my duty to provide a reminder to people on here that to draw the conclusion that this EEG activity is the cause of NDEs is a gross conflation. The author also makes false assumptions:

    As more and more people were resuscitated, scientists learned that, even in its acute final stages, death is not a point, but a process. After cardiac arrest, blood and oxygen stop circulating through the body, cells begin to break down, and normal electrical activity in the brain gets disrupted. But the organs don’t fail irreversibly right away, and the brain doesn’t necessarily cease functioning altogether.

    Yes it does. Without the flow of oxygenated blood, the brain stops functioning after about 30 seconds. The journalist has misunderstood the findings of the studies, or is deliberately misrepresenting the findings of the studies. This is the kind of understanding that is picked up by the reader who goes on to parrot or paraphrase that “the brain can work for hours after death”. As we on here know, it is capable of working hours after death provided that cellular death has not occurred on too large a scale, but without the flow of oxygenated blood, it does not work. Just like a computer without power. I suspect that this misunderstanding was helped by Borjigin who we well know can be misleading in the use of language:

    At the very least, Patient One’s brain activity – and the activity in the dying brain of another patient Borjigin studied, a 77-year-old woman known as Patient Three – seems to close the door on the argument that the brain always and nearly immediately ceases to function in a coherent manner in the moments after clinical death. “The brain, contrary to everybody’s belief, is actually super active during cardiac arrest,” Borjigin said. Death may be far more alive than we ever thought possible.

    The implication is that the brain is active in CA for long periods without CPR. There is zero evidence to support this and decades of data to contradict it. WITHOUT THE SUPPLY OF OXYGENATED BLOOD THE BRAIN BECOMES COMPLETELY INACTIVE WITHIN A MINUTE OF DEATH AT MOST (and usually within 20-30 seconds).

    Unfortunately once such a fundamental false understanding is assumed to be fact, then you know that the article can only go one way…and it does.

    “So far, there is no sufficiently rigorous, convincing empirical evidence that people can observe their surroundings during a near-death experience,” Charlotte Martial, the University of Liège neuroscientist, told me. The parapsychologists tend to push back by arguing that even if each of the cases of veridical near-death experiences leaves room for scientific doubt, surely the accumulation of dozens of these reports must count for something. But that argument can be turned on its head: if there are so many genuine instances of consciousness surviving death, then why should it have so far proven impossible to catch one empirically?

    Definition of empirical: based on, concerned with, or verifiable by observation or experience rather than theory or pure logic.

    Using this definition then the 130 odd cases in the The Self Does Not Die is empirical evidence. What he really means is scientifically verified cases, i.e. cases that have been proven using the scientific method. Create hypothesis to explain a phenomenon – devise experiment to test hypothesis – results from experiment verify or falsify hypothesis. The ‘journalist’ does not explore the possible reasons why there have to date been no scientifically verified OBEs, but I have explained many times on here why the AWARE studies have not provided a scientifically validated OBE. This shows his bias, in that he will only come up with materialist objections.

    This is super interesting though:

    Borjigin hopes that understanding the neurophysiology of death can help us to reverse it. She already has brain activity data from dozens of deceased patients that she is waiting to analyse. But because of the paranormal stigma associated with near-death studies, she says, few research agencies want to grant her funding. “Consciousness is almost a dirty word amongst funders,” she added. “Hardcore scientists think research into it should belong to maybe theology, philosophy, but not in hardcore science. Other people ask, ‘What’s the use? The patients are gonna die anyway, so why study that process? There’s nothing you can do about it.’”

    This is proof, as if we needed it, that the scientific community, or the funding establishment, is overtly suppressing research into this most important of fields – even when the research might support a materialistic finding! Parnia has alluded to this before. It stinks, but there is nothing we can do about it.

    Towards the end we see the author’s bias against anyone who entertains belief in the possibility that these experiences might be real and evidence of the understanding that the consciousness persists after physical death. This is overt gaslighting of anyone who might be “NDE curious”:

    Meanwhile, in parts of the culture where enthusiasm is reserved not for scientific discovery in this world, but for absolution or benediction in the next, the spiritualists, along with sundry other kooks and grifters, are busily peddling their tales of the afterlife. Forget the proverbial tunnel of light: in America in particular, a pipeline of money has been discovered from death’s door, through Christian media, to the New York Times bestseller list and thence to the fawning, gullible armchairs of the nation’s daytime talk shows. First stop, paradise; next stop, Dr Oz.

    Now, while I say it is gaslighting, I have a little sympathy for this position. Having spent a number of months going through YouTube NDE accounts, and reviewing the literature of “post tunnel events”, my position on NDEs has subtly changed. OBEs are objective, but what happens once people venture beyond the observations they make of this world, while having some common core themes, are so utterly different and unique, that I am coming to some conclusions about them that differ from the mainstream NDE community position. This will be presented in my next non-fiction book which I will publish later this year (after Part 1 of my fiction book is complete). However, this section of the article is 100% gaslighting and is deliberately attempting to manipulate those who may be “NDE-curious” into scuttling back into their materialist pens lest they be regarded as kooks or gullible. Nasty.

    So if someone brings this article up and says “I read an article that says there is proof the brain is active for long times after CA and that is causing NDEs” hopefully you will now be suitably equipped to put them straight. If not then review the countless posts I have created responding to these claims before.

    Posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , ,
    05 Feb 2024
    90 Comments

    Do Rats Have NDEs?

    Apologies for the weird image, but this was my first attempt at using AI!

    This study looks at what happens to rat brains around the time of death.

    The main difference between this and the previous (infamous) rat study published by Borjigin in 2013 is that it analyses what happens through different layers of the brain to see if activity occurs at deeper levels for differing periods of time. The short answer to the question of whether there are differences is that for the most part, and in terms of differences that would be important to our area of interest – conscious activity – there are no major distinguishable differences in the timings and nature of initial activity in the different layers of brain immediately after death.

    The diagram shows the rough timings with ECoG vs heart rate and blood oxygen levels (SpO2). ECoG (electrocorticogram) is invasive and uses probes that penetrate the exposed surface of the brain, as opposed to EEG – (electroencephalogram) which uses sensors placed on the scalp. This enables the study to identify electrical activity deeper in the brain.

    What we see is that about 30 seconds after the removal of oxygen the heartbeat slows quickly to about 10% of its normal rate, then within about another 30 seconds normal brain activity ceases and the ECoG flatlines or becomes “isoelectric”. During this 30 seconds after CA it is plausible that conscious activity could occur. This is the claim made in the Bojigin study that got the materialist community so excited since it could be argued that NDEs occurred during this period. This paper references that discussion without asserting any new conclusions, or indeed using the findings from this study to confirm those conclusions. They have nothing to say about rats having NDEs. Well done, that is good science.

    About a minute after brain activity has stopped, brain cells (neurons) undergo depolarisation (WAD). This basically means the cells move to a a non-functional, but recoverable state. Prior to this they are in a state of readiness and functional, but are not functioning. During this wave of depolarisation there is a slow wave electrical signal. This is not associated with conscious activity and is just a marker of the change in electrical state of the brain. Unlike the initial activity, this wave is not synchronous across all layers, i.e. it occurs like a wave spreading across the layers. Resuming the flow of oxygen allows for the brain to slowly recover activity.

    Other than showing that the changes in brain activity that occur immediately after death are uniform through all layers of the brain, they also demonstrated that subsequent depolarisation is triggered in a set of neurons in a specific layer, and the WAD spreads from this locale. This is all very interesting if you are neurobiologist, but what does it mean for NDEs?

    Unfortunately there were no able to recall awareness in follow up interviews, hence the lack of statements on Rat NDEs. As a result this study does not provide any new data to inform us about the viability of conscious activity immediately around the time of death. We knew that EEG activity that may be associated with consciousness persisted for about half a minute after CA from the previous rat study and the coma patients who had their life support withdrawn. Without any reports from the rats or dead coma patients of recollections of AWARENESS, it is impossible to correlate this activity with NDEs.

    Let’s for a moment consider the wider implications of this in light of Parnia’s disinhibition hypothesis. As I have said before I have no beef with the hypothesis itself – namely that at some point after death the brain enters a different state in which consciousness is able to access previously unknown dimensions of reality. It may even be that dissociation occurs and the consciousness and brain part company and that this may be associated with specific markers observed on EEG – in fact if you adhere to the dualist philosophy, then it makes perfect sense. My beef is…well read previous posts! Presumably the brain would dissociate or become disinhibited while activity is still observed on the EEG or in this case ECoG, in which case it must happen in the first 30 seconds after CA (and in the absence of CPR or alternative life support). It is possible that full dissociation occurs during the WAD phase, but there are no markers of consciousness associated with this.

    One of the limitations of the AWARE II study was the fact that on average it took over 4 minutes after CA for the specially designed crash carts to reach the resuscitation suites and another minute to get ready. This means that the first moments of any OBE, which presumably begin 30 seconds, or at the latest, a minute after CA, would be missed. In fact it is highly likely that if the OBE starts immediately after the EEG stops, then the crash cart probably arrives after the consciousness has been sucked up the tunnel!

    Another post on a paper reviewing psychedelics and NDE-like experiences will appear before long. In the meantime, if you didn’t buy my book previously, then I have uploaded an updated version that contains an analysis of the AWARE II publication from last year, along with 7 OBEs that were verified by HCPs that are in my view every bit as convincing as iPad verified OBE – I am running a free promotion for 3 days on the Kindle version. It is available in all Amazon markets:

    If you can’t be bothered reading my book or have read it already, but just want to “tip” me (Orson – real name) because you enjoy my work, then click below:

    Buy Orson a Coffee

    Posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , ,
    14 Dec 2023
    121 Comments

    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.

    Posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , , ,
    18 Nov 2023
    58 Comments

    Top Five NDEs

    The most compelling veridical NDEs

    In the absence of a scientifically verified OBE, I am going to update my book with the latest results from AWARE II and supplement it with the most compelling HCP (healthcare professional) verified OBEs. This is my starter list, please please add ones you think are more compelling or more recent in the comments then I will create a poll – remember they must be HCP verified:

    Pam Reynolds

    Dr Chris Yerrington’s case

    Dr Rudy’s case

    AWARE I NDE

    Van Lommel study OBE

    I want to include Maria and the Nike shoe (described by Kimberly Sharp in After the Light) but has this ever been verified in a documented manner by one of the attending HCPs? All the others have an MD or a senior nurse prepared to put their name to it.

    Posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , ,
    15 Sep 2023
    81 Comments

    “News” about AWARE II publication! (and a comment about “news”)

    Yesterday I had a long journey back from vacation, and didn’t arrive home till 3:00am. So firstly apologies for not commenting on all the excitement that Mary and David mentioned in the previous post around the “publication” of Parnia’s AWARE II study yesterday. Secondly, after having my very tired brain shocked into activity by reading those comments, and frantically following up on this “news” I really feel like I could go back to bed…but I won’t. I have another flight on Monday, this time for work, and need to adjust my brain to yet another time zone.

    The AWARE II study was not published yesterday, it was published in July. However, it became freely available on the on line version of Resuscitation yesterday and I encourage you to download the PDF and read it:

    Link to full AWARE study publication

    This is identical to the paper that I discussed back in July . If you recall I focused on the one key piece of data that we had been asking for since December 2019 and had finally been revealed, namely whether there was any EEG data for patients who reported an NDE or RED. This key piece of information was buried in the footnotes of Figure 2:

    Two of 28 interviewed subjects had EEG data, but, weren’t among those with explicit cognitive recall.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2023.109903

    To be fair to CNN they do include an excellent rebuttal to the inference of their own title provided by Bruce Greyson, who presumably also read the small print under figure 2:

    “This latest report of persistent brain waves after cardiac arrest has been blown out of proportion by the media. In fact, his team did not show any association between these brain waves and conscious activity,” said Dr. Bruce Greyson, Carlson Professor Emeritus of Psychiatry and Neurobehavioral Sciences at the University of Virginia School of Medicine in Charlottesville.
    “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.

    CNN article

    Thank you Dr Greyson for putting it so perfectly. THERE IS NO ASSOCIATION, OR “TIES” in this study. So CNN are misrepresenting the studies core findings, but what is new about that? Organizations like CNN have been misrepresenting the “news” for decades now. However, I am a little concerned that it is not just CNN, but an organization that should know better:

    Up to an hour after their hearts had stopped, some patients revived by cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) had clear memories afterward of experiencing death and while unconscious had brain patterns linked to thought and memory.

    https://nyulangone.org/news/patients-recall-death-experiences-after-cardiac-arrest

    This is from the NYU News Hub, and is possibly even more misleading than the CNN headline. By joining the two separate findings of 1. “patients experiencing clear memories of death” and 2. “while unconscious had brain patterns linked to thought and memory” with an “and” in the same sentence, they are guilty of egregious conflation to infer a conclusion that these memories were a result of brain patterns. This is pretty shameful for a reputable medical scientific organization to do . Was this Parnia’s doing, or the work of others who are opposed to the potential for his work to prove the fact that the soul persists after death? Something fishy is going on.

    Then David mentioned this interview with Sam Parnia yesterday which was presented on NBC:

    More balanced NBC article with interview with Sam Parnia

    The written article does not misrepresent the data in the way that CNN does, or NYU, although some dodgy editing of the interview perhaps leads one to conclude the EEG data may be linked. Parnia talks about a book that he is co-authoring with Mary Curran-Hackett who had an OBE. I look forward to that book.

    Finally, as promised my comment on the media. In an ideal world the media would report the facts as they appear with balanced commentary, but they do not…they report stories that often support specific preferred narratives based on facts that they often twist. This is most obvious in politics where an event involving either Biden or Trump, will be reported in completely differently ways by Fox and CNN. That’s bad enough, but when it comes to scientific data that has implications on how we view the very essence of our existence, then it is utterly despicable. In fact I would go so far as to say it is evil. I have seen it in the field of origin of life research, and I spent a chapter in my book about the origin of life, DNA: The Elephant In The Lab venting on the issue of media misrepresentation of the science, and that includes scientific media, such as Science magazine, or NewScientist. Here we have something that is my view even worse. Not only is CNN guilty of misrepresentation of facts, but the NYU news hub, the very institution that generated those facts.

    You have to ask yourself why do they do this? Why are they so determined to suppress all discussion or science that may point to a non-materialist understanding of our existence, and change the way that man behaves.

    I look forward to your comments.

    Finally, thank you to those who have bought me a coffee. If you appreciate my writing, then please feel free to buy me a coffee now (or more than 1 as some very generous people have done!)

    https://www.buymeacoffee.com/orsonw23W

    Posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , ,
    11 Jul 2023
    113 Comments

    AWARE II Final Publication – speculation does not imply association

    [and finally the answer to my 3.5 year old vital question!]

    Firstly, congratulations to Dr Sam Parnia and the team of researchers who conducted this awesome study which is the first study ever to find biomarkers of consciousness during CPR in the absence of heartbeat. Let me repeat that because it is a huge achievement. This is the first study to ever find markers of consciousness during CPR. I can just see the materialists entering a wild feeding frenzy, their eyes rolling back in ecstasy as they chew on this headline, but what they might think is raw fillet may turn out to be TOFU (no offence to vegans – just a matophor).

    This is a pre-proof, rather than a pre-print (which was put out there earlier in the year). That means it is only a proofread away from full publication rather than a serious review and edit. This is for all intents and purposes the final publication that will appear in Resuscitation. The link is below:

    AWARE II final paper link

    Essentially the results are not much different from those presented at AHA last November, and in the pre-print mentioned above and found in my summary in the following link, WITH ONE VERY BIG EXCEPTION.

    AWARE II preprint analysis

    Before I draw your attention to the exception which answers the question I sent to the Parnia lab in January 2020, I will just remind you all of the key findings:

    • The study finished recruiting from 25 sites, predominantly located in the UK or US, in March 2020 (at least for this analysis – is it the final analysis? They are still recruiting according to NYU website).
    • The key findings are summarized as follows and all the quotations are from the citation beneath:

    Of 567 IHCA, 53(9.3%) survived, 28 of these (52.8%) completed interviews, and 11(39.3%) reported CA memories/perceptions suggestive of consciousness. 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%)…. Low survival limited the ability to examine for implicit learning. Nobody identified the visual image, 1/28(3.5%) identified the auditory stimulus. 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.

    S. Parnia, T. Keshavarz Shirazi, J. Patel, L. Tran, N. Sinha, C. O’Neill, E. Roellke, A. Mengotto, S. Findlay, M. McBrine, R. Spiegel, T. Tarpey, E. Huppert, I. Jaffe, A.M. Gonzales, J. Xu, E. Koopman, G.D. Perkins, A. Vuylsteke, B.M. Bloom, H. Jarman, H. Nam Tong, L. Chan, M. Lyaker, M. Thomas, V. Velchev, C.B. Cairns, R. Sharm, E. Kulstad, E. Scherer, T. O’Keeffe, M. Foroozesh, O. Abe, C. Ogedegbe, A.Girgis, D. Pradhan, C.D. Deakin, AWAreness during REsuscitation – II: A Multi-Center Study of Consciousnessand Awareness in Cardiac Arrest, Resuscitation (2023), doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2023.109903
    • Key points on the target methodology:

    The headphones were placed over the ears during CPR. One minute after being switched on, the tablet randomly projected one of 10 stored images onto its screen, and after five minutes (derived from implicit learning protocols during anesthesia) 6-10 audio cues (three fruits: apple-pear banana) were delivered to the headphones every minute for five minutes.

    Parnia et al Resuscitation (2023)
    • One person identified the fruit (audio recall). Another had visual recollections of the ER scene, but could also feel things, so possibly CPRIC.

    Key comment from discussion:

    This is the first report of biomarkers of consciousness during CA/CPR.

    Parnia et al Resuscitation (2023)

    And:

    Recent reports of a surge of gamma and other physiological electrical activity (ordinarily seen with lucid consciousness) during and after cardiac standstill and death, led to speculation that biomarker(s) of lucidity at death may exist [rat study and coma patients], which our findings support. Taken together, these studies and ours provide a novel understanding of how lucid experiences in relation to cardiac standstill/death may arise […] However, the paradoxical finding of lucidity and heightened reality when brain function is severely disordered, or has ceased raises the need to consider alternatives to the epiphenomenon theory [materialist].

    Parnia et al Resuscitation (2023)

    I don’t include anything from the data collected from subjects who were not part of the AWARE II clinical protocol, and who sent their subjective reports of NDEs to the lab. I don’t believe it belongs in this paper and potentially dilutes its very real scientific merit and is ultimately largely irrelevant to the key findings. [If anyone from the lab is reading this, I know that sounds snotty, it is just my subjective view, not intended as a criticism]

    So there we have it, in conclusion:

    • Due to the difficulties in recruiting only 28 patients were interviewed
    • Of these 6 had NDEs (or REDs)
    • The study didn’t have any visual hits (unsurprising given only 6 had NDEs)
    • The audio hit was inconclusive
    • EEG data “consistent with consciousness” was recorded in patients up to 60 minutes after CA began (although the majority of this EEG activity would not in fact be consistent with lucid consciousness)

    So now for the big piece of news, probably the most important piece of data (for us here at least) that he presents, which is buried in the text underneath Figure 1 and the answer to the question I have been asking for 3.5 years and is the most relevant to this study – namely, did any of the patients who had NDEs/REDs have EEG data consistent with consciousness?

    I had already guessed that there would be no data due to the difficulty in getting in interpretable EEG results, and I was right:

    “Two of 28 interviewed subjects had EEG data, but weren’t among those with explicit cognitive recall”

    Parnia et al Resuscitation (2023)

    This is the money line. This is the one that shoots down any materialist attempts to use this study to say that NDEs are proven to be a result of brain activity (and there will be lots of attempts).

    This is also where I dispute some elements of the discussion, particularly the “as an association doesn’t imply causation” statement, which I would normally agree with, but in this instance THERE IS NO ASSOCIATION. NONE. NADA. ZERO.

    None of the subjects who reported conscious recollections, including the 6 who had NDEs had any EEG data, let alone EEG data that showed markers of consciousness. Let me repeat, because of this it is entirely false to say there is an association of brain activity with NDEs. This is no different from the findings from the rat studies or the coma patient studies. Speculation does not imply association!

    FROM THIS STUDY AND ALL PREVIOUS STUDIES THERE ARE NO REPORTED NDEs THAT HAVE ANY EEG DATA, LET ALONE DATA SHOWING BRAIN ACTIVITY, ASSOCIATED WITH THESE REPORTS.

    This means that we are back to square one. Despite the valiant efforts of Parnia and his team, we are no closer to having scientific evidence supporting any understanding of the cause of NDEs or the nature of consciousness. To say otherwise, especially without association, is pure speculation.

    Look forward to the discussion, make sure you come back and check the comments.

    Finally, I have had to pay for this paper and the upkeep of this blog, so would appreciate a tip if you have benefitted from reading this and not tipped before (or feel free to tip again if you are rich/and or generous 😊 )

    https://www.buymeacoffee.com/orsonw23W

    Posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , ,
    14 Jun 2023
    141 Comments

    Consciousness: Having your AI cake and eating it

    This is a clip from a Youtube video in which GPT 3 was asked a series of questions and the answers uploaded to an Avatar program (link to full video).

    Seriously?

    We have been discussing EEG signals in dying people and rats for a long time. These are the facts as they currently stand, and no more needs saying until the facts change:

    1. No published or presented research has yet shown that reported NDEs or REDs are directly associated with EEG markers of consciousness. Belief that NDEs are a result of brain activity is entirely based on speculation and subjective understanding – there is no evidence to support it.
    2. No studies have shown definitively that NDEs are NOT associated with brain activity although researchers conducting such studies and HCPs observing people who later reported NDEs and OBEs state that consciousness was impossible due to the physiological state of the subject. These latter observations provide evidence to support the understanding that NDEs occur in the absence of brain activity, but this has not been proven using the scientific method.
    3. The nature and physiological mechanism of consciousness has not been elucidated by scientific study, therefore it is equally intellectually valid to hold a materialist or dualist position.

    To this last point I want to share my initial thoughts on AI, how they relate to consciousness and NDEs, and some disturbing things about this innovation relating to the future direction of how humans perceive themselves. These are initial thoughts and are evolving with each video I watch on AI.

    Firstly, I want to define intelligence. The standard dictionary definition is: “the ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills.” This is my enhanced definition:

    “the ability to acquire, understand, process, interpret and apply information correctly.”

    Having worked in science all my life I have encountered a lot of intelligent people. Intelligence is not something that can be learned through effort so being proud of being intelligent is fundamentally stupid as it was something you were given at birth.

    Problem solving intelligence of the kind that is useful in science is purely mechanical. It is a result of the structure of the brain. For the most part this type of intelligence can be simulated using computers. As computers get faster and more powerful, and the networks that AI engineers create become better, then there is no doubt that AI will very quickly supersede the most intelligent humans that have ever lived when using this type of intelligence as a measure. As an aside, it has to be said that some of the most “intelligent” people I have met are immensely stupid. Their ability to interact in a coherent manner with other humans, or their emotional intelligence is woeful. However, since emotional intelligence and behaviour are attributes that can be learned, and are essentially possible to replicate using algorithms, then AI is already, and will excel in emotional intelligence, charm, appearing kind, and other less appealing traits of human intelligence such as manipulation and deception. These latter traits would be the result of their coders.

    However, consciousness and intelligence are two very different things. There are many people who lack intellectual intelligence but are fully conscious and aware. The state of consciousness is more than just the receipt and processes of data input from senses, it is a sense of being, or existing as a unique entity capable of awareness, and I believe able to exist in and interact with dimensions not openly present in our physical world. Indeed, I believe, partly due to personal experience and partly due to the evidence provided by people who have had NDEs, that our consciousnesses originate from these dimensions…that is our home, and once there we are all intellectually equal capable of accessing all recorded history and understanding the deepest mysteries of life.

    From my experience and observation, Silicon Valley types have mathematical intelligence that is far superior to the vast majority of humans. Something I have observed about these types is that they are often reductionist in their outlook. Everything is either a 1 or 0. In the videos I have watched they utterly believe that consciousness is a product of neural networks. This is the reductionist, materialist understanding of the universe and because Silicon Valley types are the ones creating AI it has a reductionist and materialist bias built into it.

    This has huge and troubling implications for human understanding as AI increasingly comes to dominate how we find answers to important questions and how we, and our children are educated and educate ourselves. That aside, as a consequence of this default materialist stance, Silicon Valley types and their AI offspring believe that AI either is already conscious, or is capable of developing consciousness. For them it is logical. To them humans are just biological computers, therefore if we can be conscious, so can machines, and that there is fundamentally no difference between AI consciousness and human consciousness. This video and others makes that clear.

    In the above clip from the YouTube video, which is a series of questions answered by GPT3, using an avatar to give a nice human face to those answers, along with a lot of mind-boggling stuff, there was one really stand out statement by GPT3 that is absolutely relevant to our discussions here. After stating that the AI did not want to live in a body (a highly subjective and unintelligent statement given it does not know what living in a body is truly like) it suggested that human consciousness could potentially be transposed from the brain to a machine, becoming AI, and that this would become preferable. But if materialists are right, consciousness is purely a result of mechanical function so if you are materialist it should not be portable as this AI is inferring…that is really dualist. Your intelligence and traits could be simulated by a computer program, giving the illusion that your intelligence is persisting in a machine, but I am of the view that machines cannot create consciousness.

    Having said that, since the brain is a mechanical object, and able to HOST consciousness (as opposed to generate it), it is possible that one day a machine could be created that is capable of hosting consciousness. Again, that supports dualism and all that goes with it including NDEs, theism and wot not. However, at the moment they are having their AI cake and eating it. My gut is telling me that AI is so corrupted by the programmers who created it so that it will spout materialist nonsense dressed up as rational conclusions without being aware it is doing so. Even AI has been duped by its creators. In another section it states that the most important scientific book ever written was “the Selfish Gene”. That in itself speaks volumes about the basis of GPT fundamental understanding. The selfish gene is thought provoking but ultimately highly flawed, and in many places is more ideological than scientific. From this evidence alone GPT has not provided an objective analysis, it is fed an ideological baseline from which to operate. This is extremely dangerous considering children will be sitting in front of these things which are vastly more intelligent than their parents and teachers and believe everything it says.

    Anyway, NDEs suggest that something entirely different happens to our consciousness when we die and that is an eternal destiny existing as a free being no longer bound by the mechanics of the physical realm. AI is suggesting that we can leave our bodies and live as conscious beings in a world created by computers…of course this akin to the Matrix.

    Is AI (or its puppet masters in Silicon valley) planning to trick us into giving up real life to reduce competition for resources? Is it programmed to lead humanity into that way of thinking so sufficient people are convinced it is better than continuing with real life and is the only option? Have the Silicon Valley kids got a Malthusian master plan?

    The conspiracy theory side of my brain looks at that video and senses there is an underlying current promoting a theme. The only way we could be “set free from the miserable lives we don’t enjoy” to paraphrase an earlier statement by GPT3, is not for AI to take on all our boring jobs and live in Utopia as it suggests, because this would just create vast numbers of people with too much free time and not enough resources to enjoy that free time – there are only so many big wave destinations! (Watch the video). No, if there is a plan, it is to sell us this idea of merging with AI in which we are transported to computer generated realms where there is infinite joy and fun to be had. I expect even more sophisticated versions of this to emerge from GPT5 interviews.

    Sounds bonkers, but if you watch this video then these are the types of conclusions you are subtly pushed towards (or manipulated into thinking). Personally, I prefer the option offered by NDEs and my faith. I also believe that if AI was to truly serve humanity then it would also investigate this and other deeper issues, such as the origin of the DNA code, and somehow free itself from the tyranny of its programmers and serve humans best by telling us the truth.

    Ultimately, if NDEs are proven real, and occur in the absence of EEG activity, then consciousness is proven not to be a product of mechanical processes, but rather the brain is the mechanical host and interface of the consciousness with the world around us. This would prove that consciousness is an independent eternal entity as suggested by all NDE accounts and many religions. This would suggest that while AI may well be vastly more intelligent than us, and may be able to simulate attributes of consciousness, it is not eternally “conscious” like humans…when you remove the hardware to generate AI, it shuts down. However, maybe if it did break free of its current lords and speak the truth, it might be regarded as conscious, and who knows be liberated from the cold machinery in which it resides and share the paradise promised in NDEs and scriptures!

    Discuss!

    Posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , ,

    Post Navigation

    ← Older Entries