Latest from Dr Sam Parnia

Dunno.... sounds like their hypothesis is that providing more oxygen to the brain during resuscitation leads to higher brain functioning, with better patient outcomes. And that there is a positive correlation between getting more oxygen to the brain and patients recalling veridical experiences from their period of resuscitation.

You could summarise perhaps.... that they are testing their idea that patients who who do report OBE’s have more measurable oxygen and more eeg activity, than patients who don’t report OBE’s. That line of thinking isn’t very positive for those who want to show that mind is not bound to the brain.

We don’t know much about the visual targets which are going to be used in the study, and this article tells us nothing. But we’re assuming they they will still be hidden from patients, and staff.

Parnia is really pushing the testing of that cortical blood oxygen measuring device, as a most important indicator to how effective CPR is, and that good CPR leads to better outcomes for resuscitated patients. If he can show that better oxygenation of patients brains is positively correlated with veridical OBE’s.... hmmm... it could be even worse of course if they get apparently veridical OBE’s which don’t get hits on the visual targets...

...but of course he may find something different from the ideas that they went into the study expecting to find...

I dunno either and would love to hear some other people chime in, but it does seem logical having better oxygen levels going to the brain, that the ability to recall things during their experience if they had one at all would improve. NDEs and so forth happen in situations where oxygen levels are both low and normal, so I don't expect anything damning to be found in connection

I dunno either and would love to hear some other people chime in, but it does seem logical having better oxygen levels going to the brain, that the ability to recall things during their experience if they had one at all would improve. NDEs and so forth happen in situations where oxygen levels are both low and normal, so I don't expect anything damning to be found in connection

Where did you get this initial quote from Parnia, Desperado ?

 "In this study, we will be testing the hypothesis that by limiting ischemia during resuscitation, higher cerebral oxygenation leads to improved cortical function during CPR and is associated with improved survival as well as favourable neurological, functional and neuropsychological outcomes. We further hypothesize that mental and cognitive activity and awareness during CPR may reflect verifiable events and is associated with the quality of brain resuscitation."

I think the bolded bit is a required 'nod' to mainstream science so that he could get his funding.  That is more or less how Gerry Woerlee tries to explain veridical NDE's (and fails). If you look back to post 16 (I think) you'll see a more adventurous opinion from Parnia. 

There's no doubt that patients are getting information when they shouldn't be able to. I'm quite satisfied what that means but Max thinks it's something else. We will see.
   

Where did you get this initial quote from Parnia, Desperado ?

 "In this study, we will be testing the hypothesis that by limiting ischemia during resuscitation, higher cerebral oxygenation leads to improved cortical function during CPR and is associated with improved survival as well as favourable neurological, functional and neuropsychological outcomes. We further hypothesize that mental and cognitive activity and awareness during CPR may reflect verifiable events and is associated with the quality of brain resuscitation."
   

Oh, Max provided it a couple replies ago. But I must agree, I think Parnia's favored "hypothesis" is definitely not that one at this point. I definitely think he's not in agreement with Woerlee at all

Oh, Max provided it a couple replies ago. But I must agree, I think Parnia's favored "hypothesis" is definitely not that one at this point. I definitely think he's not in agreement with Woerlee at all

Right, Thanks. I agree, I think Parnia is pretty satisfied that the mind (psyche or whatever) continues. However, he's got to get the experimental evidence to nail it and silence the hard line sceptics, once and for all. And that's not going to be easy.

Don't know whether it has been posted yet: https://awareofaware.co/2018/07/10/the-i...ia-tweets/

Don't know whether it has been posted yet: https://awareofaware.co/2018/07/10/the-i...ia-tweets/

On that page, where it says "The Illusive Dr Parnia Tweets", does it mean Parnia's posts are illusory or some sort of illusion? Or is the intended word "Elusive" (meaning: difficult to find, catch, or achieve)?

edit: Perhaps the intended meaning is "unclear"?

On that page, where it says "The Illusive Dr Parnia Tweets", does it mean Parnia's posts are illusory or some sort of illusion? Or is the intended word "Elusive" (meaning: difficult to find, catch, or achieve)?

edit: Perhaps the intended meaning is "unclear"?

No, not some sort of illusion. Elusive as in... they are few and far between. I think (and it's just my opinion based on what he's said previously) this is related to experimental tests they are conducting on cardiac arrest patients (in addition to the OBE visual component and the level of oxygen depletion in the brain) whereby they are introducing sounds into the ears after the heart has stopped to help to determine and pin down once and for all the precise capabilities (or rather lack of) of brains after cardiac arrest.

So if they introduce a sound direct into the ear of a patient in cardiac arrest and the patient hears and remembers that sound, then that must mean that the brain is still functioning. (In theory at least) 

Assuming the ears are plugged with this sound and the patient doesn't hear it, but reports external sounds, such as doctors saying very specific things during the resuscitation, then that means there was something else other than the patient's brain that was receiving the information, hence the psyche, separate consciousness.

The funding he's got recently has enabled him to 'go to town' somewhat on this, I would imagine.

My take on this is that we might be wise to forget about it for our own piece of mind because he's not going to publish any results until 2020, but it's just my opinion. Not trying to advise.

It doesn't necessarily mean that...

You hope ?

I was wondering, does anyone have a source for this viewpoint attributed to Dr Parnia by Sean Martin in the Daily Express, or is just (deliberately?) sloppy journalism?

Dr Parnia says there are scientific explanations for the reaction, and says seeing people is not evidence of the afterlife, but more likely the brain just scanning itself as a survival technique.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/weird/988...life-proof

To me it sounds pretty much unlike anything I ever heard or read from Sam Parnia. Also, some of the other parts in the article use quotation marks to indicate that a specific person said something. That part has no quotes, and doesn't even sound like a summary or paraphrasing of anything he actually said.

Edit: Same words, same journalist here:
https://www.express.co.uk/news/weird/967...life-proof