NEPTUNE Model to explain NDE's

I have not seen this article or what it contains, posted anywhere on this site yet, so here it is:

Neuroscientific model of near-death experiences finds consistent physiological pattern

What are some people's thoughts on the latest attempts to "explain away," NDE's? 

I am always interested in the scientific or physiological occurrences in these type of experiences, but one thing that constantly frustrates me, is how none of the "less rationally explainable" experiences are ever discussed. One can hypothesize various mechanisms involved, perhaps even causative of some elements of an NDE, however, when dealing with veridical perceptions and other aspects of the experience, that simply cannot be explained using the rational or traditional methods or claims. Why this is never addressed or even talked about, is peculiar to me. I guess it's because people already sometimes have their mind made up, and will go to any length to prove their opinion or stance, rather than look at all the evidence. I rarely see skeptics or "scientists/researchers" try to explain the veridical stuff. They outright ignore it and don't address it. Very frustrating.

So the claim in the article is that many aspects of the NDE can be explained by physiological models. Yeah, i guess if you ignore some of the most compelling evidence for a non materialist explanation and cherry pick what will be explained, while claiming you have debunked or explained EVERYTHING. Only then can you make the claim the article, and many skeptics , like to say.

No single experimental cohort was analyzed as the authors synthesized data from a range of previously published studies. Animal studies and neuroimaging data from critically ill patients provided insight into the physiological breakdown that may initiate NDEs.

Seems like all they did was take a bunch of old data and tried to find a model that has no experimental confirmation.

It all seems to ignore the issue that people have NDEs or just OOBEs without any clear critical illness.

All that said, personally I think NDEs are interesting but their ultimate claim for being proof of Survival is not the realms people claim to visit but the OOBE component and how it is consistent with apparitions. There's some value in that the experience of being in other realms seems to match CORTs with In Between Lives, but again CORTs are also interesting because the cases are of children who have memories of someone deceased.

Where the Physicalist faith goes wrong is trying to present NDEs as something unexpected to be brought into the world picture their beliefs want to be true. Yet there are enough, IMO, a priori reasons to discount the Physicalist picture [and see it] as the abnormal view that thinks Something (Mind) can come from Nothing (whatever the "physical" is supposed to be).

As such I expect Survival to be true because no one has a clear explanation for [how] Persons arise - even in Panpsychism and Idealism it's hand-waved, with Theism just saying "God did it" - so I have little reason to think Persons can "cease to exist" which itself is a strange claim.

Where I think a lot of proponents go wrong is to not realize how strange the idea of a Person ceasing to exist is. This makes them feel like they are clinging to gaps in the data, or hoping for something bizarrely unexpected like a total lack of neurobiological correlates for NDEs.