Evidence Of Life After Death

[ShakeZuma 585]

so is it your contention, then, that Matt Parker and Trey Stone are in fact unhappy because of their fact based beliefs that John Edward is a huge douche?

[zzz 0]

so far i've only heard second-hand accounts of unscientific studies where someone may have experienced something that was probably not possible to be heard by their physical body.i'm sorry if that evidence is good enough for you to change the way you live your life, and purposely falsify your beliefs in an effort to trick yourself into being superficially happier.

I'm sorry that you choose to be close minded.

[LongLiveYorke 38]

You are so witty. I have millions of pieces of evidence that NDEs are real. Where is your evidence?

If your "evidence" is anything like the sorry excuse for an anecdote that you posted in the original post, then I don't think I have much to worry about. Try coming back when you get some actual evidence. Since so many scientists who study NDE's are convinced that they are a purely supernatural experience, as you claim, then you should have little difficulty coming up with some scientific papers supporting your claim.So, please, post a scientific paper claiming that NDE's are not explained by science but rather only by the supernatural. Remember, it has to be a real scientific paper to count.Ready......GO!

[zzz 0]

so is it your contention, then, that Matt Parker and Trey Stone are in fact unhappy because of their fact based beliefs that John Edward is a huge douche?

????How is it fact based again? What is so bad about giving people "false" hope? HOW DARE THAT ****** JOHN EDWARD MAKE PEOPLE HAPPY!!!!

[mrdannyg 274]

????How is it fact based again? What is so bad about giving people "false" hope? HOW DARE THAT ****** JOHN EDWARD MAKE PEOPLE HAPPY!!!!

False hope is better than no hope. Yes he does help people, although I have no scientific studies proving it.

wrong wrong wrong. with false hope, you'll think everything is fine (or better), when it isn't. with no hope, you will harbour no such beliefs, and can go about improving your life/happiness.

I'm sorry that you choose to be close minded.

refer to LLY's response. i've spent quite a while now discussing this with you, hoping you had some sort of evidence beyond some silly anecdote. if you can present a single scientific paper or opinion that proves any of your points, to even a small degree, i will reconsider. and yes, i have read the wikipedia article, and no, it does not meet those qualifications. if i handed any of the stuff on the wikipedia page into a first-year professor, he'd laugh at me.

[ShakeZuma 585]

????How is it fact based again? What is so bad about giving people "false" hope? HOW DARE THAT ****** JOHN EDWARD MAKE PEOPLE HAPPY!!!!

jokes on you sucker. their names are matt parker and trey stone!!! see!!! I switched them!!! hahahaha, now your argument is useless!!!!

[zzz 0]

If your "evidence" is anything like the sorry excuse for an anecdote that you posted in the original post, then I don't think I have much to worry about. Try coming back when you get some actual evidence . Since so many scientists who study NDE's are convinced that they are a purely supernatural experience, as you claim, then you should have little difficulty coming up with some scientific papers supporting your claim.So, please, post a scientific paper claiming that NDE's are not explained by science but rather only by the supernatural. Remember, it has to be a real scientific paper to count.Ready......GO!

That is actual evidence. I am sorry you are too close minded to see that. Maybe science doesn't have the answers to everything . I have the millions of experiences reported by NDEers. That is as real info as it gets.

[mrdannyg 274]

That is actual evidence. I am sorry you are too close minded to see that. Maybe science doesn't have the answers to everything . I have the millions of experiences reported by NDEers. That is as real info as it gets.

yesterday, i watched an ice cream cone eat a hamburger.

[ShakeZuma 585]

yesterday, i watched an ice cream cone eat a hamburger.

I did too.FACT.

[zzz 0]

John Edward is yet another example of evidence of life after death.

[Loismustdie 0]

Science can't disprove anything. You can't disprove the Invisable Pink Unicorn created the universe. Do you believe it since it can't be disproven?What science can prove is that consciousness is the result of brain activity. We can alter human memory and personality. We can alter preceptions. We can measure when a memory is triggered. We can trigger specific memories. We can trigger specific emotions. We have very solid understding of how the human brain works and how it manifests its workings as consciouness.And there is no room within that understanding for a possibility of that consciousness existing outside the brain.In short, I can't disprove that flying monkeys are not domiciled within my rectum, but I'm not expecting them to come flying out anytime soon.

Like I said, call me the day you are dying. We will talk then.

[Canada 0]

Tell the truth. You're a joke account, right? From this point on I'm just assuming that you are. Good one.

I don't think he's a joke account.It's JFarrell20 after giving up on poker and starting on religion

[zzz 0]

About the Continuity of Our Consciousness Pim van Lommel, Cardiologist, Division of Cardiology, Hospital Rijnstate, PO Box 9555, 6800 TA Arnhem, The Netherlands. Previous: About Death Next: Some Typical Elements of NDE --------------------------------------------------------------------------------SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH ON NEAR-DEATH EXPERIENCE In 1969 during my rotating internship a patient was successfully resuscitated in the cardiac ward by electrical defibrillation. The patient regained consciousness, and was very, very disappointed. He told me about a tunnel, beautiful colours, a light and beautiful music. I have never forgotten this event, but I did not do anything with it. Years later, in 1976 Raymond Moody first described the so-called “near-death experiences”, and only in 1986 I read about these experiences in the book by George Ritchieentitled “Return from Tomorrow,” which relates what he experienced during a period of clinical death of 6-minutes duration in 1943 during his medical study.4 After reading his book I started to interview my patients who had survived a cardiac arrest. To my great surprise, within two years about fifty patients told me about their NDE.My scientific curiosity started to grow, because according to our current medical concepts, it is not possible to experience consciousness during a cardiac arrest, when circulation and breathing have ceased. Several theories on the origin of an NDE have been proposed. Some think the experience is caused by physiological changes in the brain such as brain cells dying as a result of cerebral anoxia, and possibly also caused by release of endorphins, or NMDA receptor blockade.5 Other theories encompass a psychological reaction to approaching death6 or a combination of such reaction and anoxia.7 But until now there was no prospective, meticulous and scientifically designed study to explain the cause and content of an NDE. All studies had been retrospective and very selective with respect to patients. In retrospective studies 5-30 years can elapse between occurrence of the experience and its investigation, which often prevents accurate assessment of medical and pharmacological factors. We wanted to know if there could be a physiological, pharmacological, psychological or demographic explanation why people experience consciousness during a period of clinical death. The definition of clinical death was used for the period of unconsciousness caused by anoxia of the brain due to the arrest of circulation and breathing that happens during ventricular fibrillation in patients with acute myocardial infarction.We studied patients who survived cardiac arrest, because this is a well-described life threatening medical situation, where patients will ultimately die from irreversible damage to the brain if cardio-pulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is not initiated within 5 to 10 minutes. It is the closest model of the process of dying.So, in 1988 we started a prospective study of 344 consecutive survivors of cardiac arrest in ten Dutch hospitals with the aim of investigating the frequency, the cause and the content of an NDE.1 We did a short standardised interview with sufficiently recovered patients within a few days of resuscitation, and asked whether they could remember the period of unconsciousness, and what they recalled. In cases where memories were reported, we coded the experiences according to a weighted core experience index. In this system the depth of the NDE was measured according to the reported elements of the content of the NDE. The more elements were reported, the deeper the experience was and the higher the resulting score was.Results: 62 patients (18%) reported some recollection of the time of clinical death. Of these patients 41 (12%) had a core experience with a score of 6 or higher, and 21 (6%) had a superficial NDE. In the core group 23 patients (7%) reported a deep or very deep experience with a score of 10 or higher. And 282 patients (82%) had no recollection of the period of cardiac arrest.In the American prospective study of 116 survivors of cardiac arrest 11 patients (10%) reported an NDE with a score of 6 or higher; the investigators did not specify the number of patients with a superficial NDE with a low score.2 In the British prospective study of 63 survivors of cardiac arrest only 4 patients (6.3%) reported an NDE with a score of 6 or higher, and 3 patients (4.8%) had a superficial NDE, a total of 7 patients (11%) with memories from the period of cardiac arrest.3In our study about 50% of the patients with an NDE reported awareness of being dead, or had positive emotions, 30% reported moving through a tunnel, had an observation of a celestial landscape, or had a meeting with deceased relatives. About 25% of the patients with an NDE had an out-of-body experience, had communication with “the light,” or observed colours, 13% experienced a life review, and 8% experienced a border.What might distinguish the small percentage of patients who report an NDE from those who do not? We found that neither the duration of cardiac arrest nor the duration of unconsciousness, nor the need for intubation in complicated CPR, nor induced cardiac arrest in electrophysiological stimulation (EPS) had any influence on the frequency of NDE. Neither could we find any relationship between the frequency of NDE and administered drugs, fear of death before the arrest, foreknowledge of NDE, religion or education. An NDE was more frequently reported at ages lower than 60 years, and also by patients who had had more than one CPR during their hospital stay, and by patients who had experienced an NDE previously. Patients with memory defects induced by lengthy CPR reported an NDE less frequently. Good short-term memory seems to be essential for remembering an NDE. Unexpectedly, we found that significantly more patients who had an NDE, especially a deep experience, died within 30 days of CPR (p<0.0001).We performed a longitudinal study with taped interviews of all late survivors with NDE 2 and 8 years following the cardiac arrest, along with a matched control group of survivors of cardiac arrest who did not report an NDE.1 This study was designed to assess whether the transformation in attitude toward life and death following an NDE is the result of having an NDE or the result of the cardiac arrest itself. In this follow-up research into transformational processes after NDE, we found a significant difference between patients with and without an NDE. The process of transformation took several years to consolidate. Patients with an NDE did not show any fear of death, they strongly believed in an afterlife, and their insight in what is important in life had changed: love and compassion for oneself, for others, and for nature. They now understood the cosmic law that everything one does to others will ultimately be returned to oneself: hatred and violence as well as love and compassion. Remarkably, there was often evidence of increased intuitive feelings. Furthermore, the long lasting transformational effects of an experience that lasts only a few minutes was a surprising and unexpected finding.Several theories have been proposed to explain NDE. However, in our prospective study we did not show that psychological, physiological or pharmacological factors caused these experiences after cardiac arrest. With a purely physiological explanation such as cerebral anoxia, most patients who had been clinically dead should report an NDE. All 344 patients had been unconscious because of anoxia of the brain resulting from their cardiac arrest. Why should only 18% of the survivors of cardiac arrest report an NDE?And yet, neurophysiological processes must play some part in NDE, because NDE-like experiences can be induced through electrical “stimulation” of some parts of the cortex in patients with epilepsy,8 with high carbon dioxide levels (hypercarbia)9 and in decreased cerebral perfusion resulting in local cerebral hypoxia, as in rapid acceleration during training of fighter pilots,10 or as in hyperventilation followed by Valsalva maneuver.11 Also NDE-like experiences have been reported after the use of drugs like ketamine,12 LSD,13 or mushrooms.14 These induced experiences can sometimes result in a period of unconsciousness, but can at the same time also consist of out-of-body experiences, perception of sound, light or flashes of recollections from the past. These recollections, however, consist of fragmented and random memories unlike the panoramic life-review that can occur in NDE. Further, transformational processes are rarely reported after induced experiences. Thus, induced experiences are not identical to NDE.Another theory holds that NDE might be a changing state of consciousness (transcendence, or the theory of continuity), in which memories, identity, and cognition, with emotion, function independently from the unconscious body, and retain the possibility of non-sensory perception. Obviously, consciousness during NDE was experienced independently from the normal body-linked waking consciousness.With lack of evidence for any other theories for NDE, the concept thus far assumed but never scientifically proven, that consciousness and memories are localized in the brain should be discussed. Traditionally, it has been argued that thoughts or consciousness are produced by large groups of neurons or neuronal networks. How could a clear consciousness outside one’s body be experienced at the moment that the brain no longer functions during a period of clinical death, with flat EEG?15 Furthermore, blind people have also described veridical perceptions during out-of-body experiences at the time of their NDE.16 Scientific study of NDE pushes us to the limits of our medical and neurophysiological ideas about the range of human consciousness and relationship of consciousness and memories to the brain.Also Greyson2 writes in his discussion: “No one physiological or psychological model by itself explains all the common features of NDE. The paradoxical occurrence of heightened, lucid awareness and logical thought processes during a period of impaired cerebral perfusion raises particular perplexing questions for our current understanding of consciousness and its relation to brain function. A clear sensorium and complex perceptual processes during a period of apparent clinical death challenge the concept that consciousness is localized exclusively in the brain.” And Parnia and Fenwick3 write in their discussion: “The data suggest that the NDE arises during unconsciousness. This is a surprising conclusion, because when the brain is so dysfunctional that the patient is deeply comatose, the cerebral structures, which underpin subjective experience and memory, must be severely impaired. Complex experiences such as are reported in the NDE should not arise or be retained in memory. Such patients would be expected to have no subjective experience [as was the case in the vast majority of patients who survive cardiac arrest in the three published prospective studies1-3 or at best a confusional state if some brain function is retained. Even if the unconscious brain is flooded by neurotransmitters this should not produce clear, lucid remembered experiences, as those cerebral modules, which generate conscious experience, are impaired by cerebral anoxia. The fact that in a cardiac arrest loss of cortical function precedes the rapid loss of brainstem activity lends further support to this view. An alternative explanation would be that the observed experiences arise during the loss of, or on regaining consciousness. The transition from consciousness to unconsciousness is rapid, with the EEG showing changes within a few seconds, and appearing immediate to the subject. Experiences which occur during the recovery of consciousness are confusional, which these were not”. In fact, memory is a very sensitive indicator of brain injury and the length of amnesia before and after unconsciousness is an indicator of the severity of the injury. Therefore, events that occur just prior to or just after loss of consciousness would not be expected to be recalled. And as stated before, in our study1 patients with loss of memory induced by lengthy CPR reported significantly fewer NDE. Good short-term memory seems to be essential for remembering NDE.

[zzz 0]

wrong wrong wrong. with false hope, you'll think everything is fine (or better), when it isn't. with no hope, you will harbour no such beliefs, and can go about improving your life/happiness.

Here is an example of "false" hope from your point of view. "Martha" gets a reading from John Edward. John Edward is a very good cold reader and he can't actually talk to dead people because they no longer exist. Martha is a 30yr old widdow and is convinced by John's reading that her dead husband is alive in spirit form and doing well. Naturally, this eases her grief and suffering a great deal. For the next 50yrs she lives a more peaceful and happy life thanks to John. At age 80 she dies and ceases to exist. John Edwards has only impacted Martha's life in a positive way, no? Again, how is helping someone become a happier person immoral and bad?

[mrdannyg 274]

Here is an example of "false" hope from your point of view. "Martha" gets a reading from John Edward. John Edward is a very good cold reader and he can't actually talk to dead people because they no longer exist. Martha is a 30yr old widdow and is convinced by John's reading that her dead husband is alive in spirit form and doing well. Naturally, this eases her grief and suffering a great deal. For the next 50yrs she lives a more peaceful and happy life thanks to John. At age 80 she dies and ceases to exist. John Edwards has only impacted Martha's life in a positive way, no? Again, how is helping someone become a happier person immoral and bad?

as i said before, i don't think true ignorance is possible, therefore when ignorance seems to cause happiness, the person is in fact well aware of the huge amount of doubt surrounding it, and not actually happy.if a person could really be completely ignorant (i.e. of the fact John Edward did not really talk to her husband), then she could be considered 'happier' (in a superficial way) because of him.

[zzz 0]

as i said before, i don't think true ignorance is possible, therefore when ignorance seems to cause happiness, the person is in fact well aware of the huge amount of doubt surrounding it, and not actually happy.if a person could really be completely ignorant (i.e. of the fact John Edward did not really talk to her husband), then she could be considered 'happier' (in a superficial way) because of him.

Lol, no. In the example there was extremely little doubt for Martha that John Edward really got the information from "dead" people, eventhough outside observers claim he is a fake. Therefore, yes she was much happier because of John Edward. Again, John Edwards has only impacted Martha's life in a positive way, no? How is helping someone become a happier person immoral and bad?

[mrdannyg 274]

Lol, no. In the example there was extremely little doubt for Martha that John Edward really got the information from "dead" people, eventhough outside observers claim he is a fake. Therefore, yes she was much happier because of John Edward. Again, John Edwards has only impacted Martha's life in a positive way, no? How is helping someone become a happier person immoral and bad?

if martha believes there is very little doubt, she must be living under a rock. if she is not living under a rock, she must at least realize that most people would not think J.E. had actually talked to her dead husband.She can believe what she wants, but at the very least, she must realize a lot of people disagree, so there is a lot of doubt surrounding it. this means JE only makes her happier if she chooses to keep herself ignorant.you seem to be ignoring that for every person who believes their personal experience is enough for a factual basis, there are several people who lack that experience. there is no explanation as to why other people, even religious, pious people, who are in cardiac arrest or near-death, do not experience these NDEs.

[crowTrobot 2]

Here is an example of "false" hope from your point of view. "Martha" gets a reading from John Edward. John Edward is a very good cold reader and he can't actually talk to dead people because they no longer exist. Martha is a 30yr old widdow and is convinced by John's reading that her dead husband is alive in spirit form and doing well. Naturally, this eases her grief and suffering a great deal. For the next 50yrs she lives a more peaceful and happy life thanks to John. At age 80 she dies and ceases to exist. John Edwards has only impacted Martha's life in a positive way, no? Again, how is helping someone become a happier person immoral and bad?

this would only be valid for weak-minded, ignorant people - such as those already predisposed to religious belief anyway. odds are if martha is capable of being convinced by john, she already believes in an afterlife. no need for john.and very few people who had already concluded there wasn't an afterlife would be capable of being fooled by john, and most wouldn't desire to be anyway because objectivity and reality are what makes them happy.

[zzz 0]

if martha believes there is very little doubt, she must be living under a rock. if she is not living under a rock, she must at least realize that most people would not think J.E. had actually talked to her dead husband.She can believe what she wants, but at the very least, she must realize a lot of people disagree, so there is a lot of doubt surrounding it. this means JE only makes her happier if she chooses to keep herself ignorant.you seem to be ignoring that for every person who believes their personal experience is enough for a factual basis, there are several people who lack that experience. there is no explanation as to why other people, even religious, pious people, who are in cardiac arrest or near-death, do not experience these NDEs.

Lol, no. If John read "Martha" and validated things nobody could have known (which has been done) except Martha than all the critics in the world wouldn't be enough to cause her to doubt. Everyone being read by John has left feeling as happy, and in most cases happier than before the reading. Again, how is helping someone become a happier person immoral and bad?Apparantly you haven't read the scientific research presented earlier today.

[mrdannyg 274]

Lol, no. If John read "Martha" and validated things nobody could have known (which has been done) except Martha than all the critics in the world wouldn't be enough to cause her to doubt. Everyone being read by John has left feeling as happy, and in most cases happier than before the reading. Again, how is helping someone become a happier person immoral and bad?Apparantly you haven't read the scientific research presented earlier today.

i know its a cartoon, but they're still right:South Parkevery 'scientific' study you've linked us to has said that neuroscientific aspects can be ignored since no single neurological occurance can explain every NDE-related phenomenon that people may have experienced. do i need to explain why this is not a valid disqualification?and if you can't disqualify the other sides evidence, yours ain't too strong.

[zzz 0]

this would only be valid for weak-minded, ignorant people - such as those already predisposed to religious belief anyway. odds are if martha is capable of being convinced by john, she already believes in an afterlife. no need for john.and very few people who had already concluded there wasn't an afterlife would be capable of being fooled by john, and most wouldn't desire to be anyway because objectivity and reality are what makes them happy.

There is a great deal of circumstantial and scientific evidence that supports life after death. I know you have ignored all the millions of pieces of circumstantial evidence. Do you have any input on the scientific evidence I have presented?

i know its a cartoon, but they're still right:http://www.dailymotion.com/flash/flvplayer...tatSection=blogand no scientific evidence was presented in this thread today.

Wrong. Here it is again. Feel free to comment on it.About the Continuity of Our Consciousness Pim van Lommel, Cardiologist, Division of Cardiology, Hospital Rijnstate, PO Box 9555, 6800 TA Arnhem, The Netherlands. SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH ON NEAR-DEATH EXPERIENCE In 1969 during my rotating internship a patient was successfully resuscitated in the cardiac ward by electrical defibrillation. The patient regained consciousness, and was very, very disappointed. He told me about a tunnel, beautiful colours, a light and beautiful music. I have never forgotten this event, but I did not do anything with it. Years later, in 1976 Raymond Moody first described the so-called “near-death experiences”, and only in 1986 I read about these experiences in the book by George Ritchieentitled “Return from Tomorrow,” which relates what he experienced during a period of clinical death of 6-minutes duration in 1943 during his medical study.4 After reading his book I started to interview my patients who had survived a cardiac arrest. To my great surprise, within two years about fifty patients told me about their NDE.My scientific curiosity started to grow, because according to our current medical concepts, it is not possible to experience consciousness during a cardiac arrest, when circulation and breathing have ceased. Several theories on the origin of an NDE have been proposed. Some think the experience is caused by physiological changes in the brain such as brain cells dying as a result of cerebral anoxia, and possibly also caused by release of endorphins, or NMDA receptor blockade.5 Other theories encompass a psychological reaction to approaching death6 or a combination of such reaction and anoxia.7 But until now there was no prospective, meticulous and scientifically designed study to explain the cause and content of an NDE. All studies had been retrospective and very selective with respect to patients. In retrospective studies 5-30 years can elapse between occurrence of the experience and its investigation, which often prevents accurate assessment of medical and pharmacological factors. We wanted to know if there could be a physiological, pharmacological, psychological or demographic explanation why people experience consciousness during a period of clinical death. The definition of clinical death was used for the period of unconsciousness caused by anoxia of the brain due to the arrest of circulation and breathing that happens during ventricular fibrillation in patients with acute myocardial infarction.We studied patients who survived cardiac arrest, because this is a well-described life threatening medical situation, where patients will ultimately die from irreversible damage to the brain if cardio-pulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is not initiated within 5 to 10 minutes. It is the closest model of the process of dying.So, in 1988 we started a prospective study of 344 consecutive survivors of cardiac arrest in ten Dutch hospitals with the aim of investigating the frequency, the cause and the content of an NDE.1 We did a short standardised interview with sufficiently recovered patients within a few days of resuscitation, and asked whether they could remember the period of unconsciousness, and what they recalled. In cases where memories were reported, we coded the experiences according to a weighted core experience index. In this system the depth of the NDE was measured according to the reported elements of the content of the NDE. The more elements were reported, the deeper the experience was and the higher the resulting score was.Results: 62 patients (18%) reported some recollection of the time of clinical death. Of these patients 41 (12%) had a core experience with a score of 6 or higher, and 21 (6%) had a superficial NDE. In the core group 23 patients (7%) reported a deep or very deep experience with a score of 10 or higher. And 282 patients (82%) had no recollection of the period of cardiac arrest.In the American prospective study of 116 survivors of cardiac arrest 11 patients (10%) reported an NDE with a score of 6 or higher; the investigators did not specify the number of patients with a superficial NDE with a low score.2 In the British prospective study of 63 survivors of cardiac arrest only 4 patients (6.3%) reported an NDE with a score of 6 or higher, and 3 patients (4.8%) had a superficial NDE, a total of 7 patients (11%) with memories from the period of cardiac arrest.3In our study about 50% of the patients with an NDE reported awareness of being dead, or had positive emotions, 30% reported moving through a tunnel, had an observation of a celestial landscape, or had a meeting with deceased relatives. About 25% of the patients with an NDE had an out-of-body experience, had communication with “the light,” or observed colours, 13% experienced a life review, and 8% experienced a border.What might distinguish the small percentage of patients who report an NDE from those who do not? We found that neither the duration of cardiac arrest nor the duration of unconsciousness, nor the need for intubation in complicated CPR, nor induced cardiac arrest in electrophysiological stimulation (EPS) had any influence on the frequency of NDE. Neither could we find any relationship between the frequency of NDE and administered drugs, fear of death before the arrest, foreknowledge of NDE, religion or education. An NDE was more frequently reported at ages lower than 60 years, and also by patients who had had more than one CPR during their hospital stay, and by patients who had experienced an NDE previously. Patients with memory defects induced by lengthy CPR reported an NDE less frequently. Good short-term memory seems to be essential for remembering an NDE. Unexpectedly, we found that significantly more patients who had an NDE, especially a deep experience, died within 30 days of CPR (p<0.0001).We performed a longitudinal study with taped interviews of all late survivors with NDE 2 and 8 years following the cardiac arrest, along with a matched control group of survivors of cardiac arrest who did not report an NDE.1 This study was designed to assess whether the transformation in attitude toward life and death following an NDE is the result of having an NDE or the result of the cardiac arrest itself. In this follow-up research into transformational processes after NDE, we found a significant difference between patients with and without an NDE. The process of transformation took several years to consolidate. Patients with an NDE did not show any fear of death, they strongly believed in an afterlife, and their insight in what is important in life had changed: love and compassion for oneself, for others, and for nature. They now understood the cosmic law that everything one does to others will ultimately be returned to oneself: hatred and violence as well as love and compassion. Remarkably, there was often evidence of increased intuitive feelings. Furthermore, the long lasting transformational effects of an experience that lasts only a few minutes was a surprising and unexpected finding.Several theories have been proposed to explain NDE. However, in our prospective study we did not show that psychological, physiological or pharmacological factors caused these experiences after cardiac arrest. With a purely physiological explanation such as cerebral anoxia, most patients who had been clinically dead should report an NDE. All 344 patients had been unconscious because of anoxia of the brain resulting from their cardiac arrest. Why should only 18% of the survivors of cardiac arrest report an NDE?And yet, neurophysiological processes must play some part in NDE, because NDE-like experiences can be induced through electrical “stimulation” of some parts of the cortex in patients with epilepsy,8 with high carbon dioxide levels (hypercarbia)9 and in decreased cerebral perfusion resulting in local cerebral hypoxia, as in rapid acceleration during training of fighter pilots,10 or as in hyperventilation followed by Valsalva maneuver.11 Also NDE-like experiences have been reported after the use of drugs like ketamine,12 LSD,13 or mushrooms.14 These induced experiences can sometimes result in a period of unconsciousness, but can at the same time also consist of out-of-body experiences, perception of sound, light or flashes of recollections from the past. These recollections, however, consist of fragmented and random memories unlike the panoramic life-review that can occur in NDE. Further, transformational processes are rarely reported after induced experiences. Thus, induced experiences are not identical to NDE.Another theory holds that NDE might be a changing state of consciousness (transcendence, or the theory of continuity), in which memories, identity, and cognition, with emotion, function independently from the unconscious body, and retain the possibility of non-sensory perception. Obviously, consciousness during NDE was experienced independently from the normal body-linked waking consciousness.With lack of evidence for any other theories for NDE, the concept thus far assumed but never scientifically proven, that consciousness and memories are localized in the brain should be discussed. Traditionally, it has been argued that thoughts or consciousness are produced by large groups of neurons or neuronal networks. How could a clear consciousness outside one’s body be experienced at the moment that the brain no longer functions during a period of clinical death, with flat EEG?15 Furthermore, blind people have also described veridical perceptions during out-of-body experiences at the time of their NDE.16 Scientific study of NDE pushes us to the limits of our medical and neurophysiological ideas about the range of human consciousness and relationship of consciousness and memories to the brain.Also Greyson2 writes in his discussion: “No one physiological or psychological model by itself explains all the common features of NDE. The paradoxical occurrence of heightened, lucid awareness and logical thought processes during a period of impaired cerebral perfusion raises particular perplexing questions for our current understanding of consciousness and its relation to brain function. A clear sensorium and complex perceptual processes during a period of apparent clinical death challenge the concept that consciousness is localized exclusively in the brain.” And Parnia and Fenwick3 write in their discussion: “The data suggest that the NDE arises during unconsciousness. This is a surprising conclusion, because when the brain is so dysfunctional that the patient is deeply comatose, the cerebral structures, which underpin subjective experience and memory, must be severely impaired. Complex experiences such as are reported in the NDE should not arise or be retained in memory. Such patients would be expected to have no subjective experience [as was the case in the vast majority of patients who survive cardiac arrest in the three published prospective studies1-3 or at best a confusional state if some brain function is retained. Even if the unconscious brain is flooded by neurotransmitters this should not produce clear, lucid remembered experiences, as those cerebral modules, which generate conscious experience, are impaired by cerebral anoxia. The fact that in a cardiac arrest loss of cortical function precedes the rapid loss of brainstem activity lends further support to this view. An alternative explanation would be that the observed experiences arise during the loss of, or on regaining consciousness. The transition from consciousness to unconsciousness is rapid, with the EEG showing changes within a few seconds, and appearing immediate to the subject. Experiences which occur during the recovery of consciousness are confusional, which these were not”. In fact, memory is a very sensitive indicator of brain injury and the length of amnesia before and after unconsciousness is an indicator of the severity of the injury. Therefore, events that occur just prior to or just after loss of consciousness would not be expected to be recalled. And as stated before, in our study1 patients with loss of memory induced by lengthy CPR reported significantly fewer NDE. Good short-term memory seems to be essential for remembering NDE.

i know its a cartoon, but they're still right:South Park

Again, how is helping someone immoral or bad?

[LongLiveYorke 38]

Do you have any input on the scientific evidence I have presented?

Yes. It seems like a decent study that has nothing to do with your claim and in now way supports or even attempts to support the fact that there is life after death.

[mrdannyg 274]

Wrong. Here it is again. Feel free to comment on it.Again, how is helping someone immoral or bad?

post has been edited, though to call this study 'scientific' is a stretch."bad" is questionable, but there is no doubt it is immoral. it is both superficial and manipulative.do you really think manipulating people is ok? i'm pretty sure machiavelli would be considered 'immoral' by most people.and as LLY pointed out, your original point was life after death, not the existence of NDE's. so far the only link that has been made between the two was one editorial comment in a wikipedia article.

[Loismustdie 0]

I love this thread. Just to state the obvious, there is no possible way to prove life after death. For the sake of argument though, why don't we go Flatliners and give it a shot? Do we have any doctors on this board that could give us a hand? Or maybe just a guy with some jumper cables? I'm down.

[LongLiveYorke 38]

Let's go through what this article actually states as fact and see if any of it supports life after death:

Several theories on the origin of an NDE have been proposed. Some think the experience is caused by physiological changes in the brain such as brain cells dying as a result of cerebral anoxia, and possibly also caused by release of endorphins, or NMDA receptor blockade. Other theories encompass a psychological reaction to approaching death or a combination of such reaction and anoxia.

There are many theories about exactly what causes NDE

Results: 62 patients (18%) reported some recollection of the time of clinical death. Of these patients 41 (12%) had a core experience with a score of 6 or higher, and 21 (6%) had a superficial NDE. In the core group 23 patients (7%) reported a deep or very deep experience with a score of 10 or higher. And 282 patients (82%) had no recollection of the period of cardiac arrest.In the American prospective study of 116 survivors of cardiac arrest 11 patients (10%) reported an NDE with a score of 6 or higher; the investigators did not specify the number of patients with a superficial NDE with a low score.2 In the British prospective study of 63 survivors of cardiac arrest only 4 patients (6.3%) reported an NDE with a score of 6 or higher, and 3 patients (4.8%) had a superficial NDE, a total of 7 patients (11%) with memories from the period of cardiac arrest.3In our study about 50% of the patients with an NDE reported awareness of being dead, or had positive emotions, 30% reported moving through a tunnel, had an observation of a celestial landscape, or had a meeting with deceased relatives. About 25% of the patients with an NDE had an out-of-body experience, had communication with “the light,” or observed colours, 13% experienced a life review, and 8% experienced a border.What might distinguish the small percentage of patients who report an NDE from those who do not? We found that neither the duration of cardiac arrest nor the duration of unconsciousness, nor the need for intubation in complicated CPR, nor induced cardiac arrest in electrophysiological stimulation (EPS) had any influence on the frequency of NDE. Neither could we find any relationship between the frequency of NDE and administered drugs, fear of death before the arrest, foreknowledge of NDE, religion or education. An NDE was more frequently reported at ages lower than 60 years, and also by patients who had had more than one CPR during their hospital stay, and by patients who had experienced an NDE previously. Patients with memory defects induced by lengthy CPR reported an NDE less frequently. Good short-term memory seems to be essential for remembering an NDE. Unexpectedly, we found that significantly more patients who had an NDE, especially a deep experience, died within 30 days of CPR (p<0.0001).

Results of the research preformed. It gives some numbers and some coorelations and lack of coorelations. Again, no life after death. Plain, boring numbers.

We performed a longitudinal study with taped interviews of all late survivors with NDE 2 and 8 years following the cardiac arrest, along with a matched control group of survivors of cardiac arrest who did not report an NDE.1 This study was designed to assess whether the transformation in attitude toward life and death following an NDE is the result of having an NDE or the result of the cardiac arrest itself. In this follow-up research into transformational processes after NDE, we found a significant difference between patients with and without an NDE. The process of transformation took several years to consolidate. Patients with an NDE did not show any fear of death, they strongly believed in an afterlife, and their insight in what is important in life had changed: love and compassion for oneself, for others, and for nature. They now understood the cosmic law that everything one does to others will ultimately be returned to oneself: hatred and violence as well as love and compassion. Remarkably, there was often evidence of increased intuitive feelings. Furthermore, the long lasting transformational effects of an experience that lasts only a few minutes was a surprising and unexpected finding.

Survivers are more likely to believe in the supernatural and their personalities are altered in several ways. Remember, just because people go through something that makes them believe in the afterlife doesn't mean that the afterlife actually exists. I hope this is obvious, but you never know.

Several theories have been proposed to explain NDE. However, in our prospective study we did not show that psychological, physiological or pharmacological factors caused these experiences after cardiac arrest. With a purely physiological explanation such as cerebral anoxia, most patients who had been clinically dead should report an NDE. All 344 patients had been unconscious because of anoxia of the brain resulting from their cardiac arrest. Why should only 18% of the survivors of cardiac arrest report an NDE?

We did not find a common factor that leads to NDE.

And yet, neurophysiological processes must play some part in NDE, because NDE-like experiences can be induced through electrical “stimulation” of some parts of the cortex in patients with epilepsy, with high carbon dioxide levels (hypercarbia)9 and in decreased cerebral perfusion resulting in local cerebral hypoxia, as in rapid acceleration during training of fighter pilots,10 or as in hyperventilation followed by Valsalva maneuver.11 Also NDE-like experiences have been reported after the use of drugs like ketamine,12 LSD,13 or mushrooms.14 These induced experiences can sometimes result in a period of unconsciousness, but can at the same time also consist of out-of-body experiences, perception of sound, light or flashes of recollections from the past. These recollections, however, consist of fragmented and random memories unlike the panoramic life-review that can occur in NDE. Further, transformational processes are rarely reported after induced experiences. Thus, induced experiences are not identical to NDE.

It must be related to neuroscience because many other experiences (not assocaited with life after death) lead to similar, though not identical, experiences.

With lack of evidence for any other theories for NDE, the concept thus far assumed but never scientifically proven, that consciousness and memories are localized in the brain should be discussed. Traditionally, it has been argued that thoughts or consciousness are produced by large groups of neurons or neuronal networks. How could a clear consciousness outside one’s body be experienced at the moment that the brain no longer functions during a period of clinical death, with flat EEG? Furthermore, blind people have also described veridical perceptions during out-of-body experiences at the time of their NDE. Scientific study of NDE pushes us to the limits of our medical and neurophysiological ideas about the range of human consciousness and relationship of consciousness and memories to the brain.

And here's where he states what I'm assuming is why you posted the article. He states that we must consider the possability that consciousness and memories aren't localized in the brain. Notice first how he says that this idea has never been scietifically proven (so right off the bat he shoots down your claims that there is unquestionable evidence for what you claim). Notice also that he is not claiming anything about life after death. Also, notice that this segment doesn't involve any of the evidence that was aquired as a part of his research (which came in the form of survey data concerning patients who experienced a NDE). This segment isn't even a part of his conclusion. It's more of the speculation section of his paper, and it doesn't say anything of any value. His claim is that the brain may only be one part of the overall human consciousness (a claim I disagree with).So, at no point was the concept of a soul or life after death brought up, and at no point was any evidence for these things even alluded to (probably because there is none anywhere). Also, if you wanted to post this, you should have posted the actual paper version: LinkySo, if you'd like to post another paper that actually have evidence for life after death instead of shaky conclusions not about life after death that are only based on the lack of a working theory, be my guest.