Reddit thread on what people who died and came back experienced

Maybe you can find your post after, all you said it
Tim you referenced a study which I was not referring to. The one I posted about and mentioned today is I believe recent and as far as I know not relevant to the study you thought I was referring to. Though you don't like the findings of the study you should at least acknowledge you just might be wrong. Perhaps you should refresh your memory by reading the study. What say you ol' chap?

If you can find me a study which demonstrates that after blood flow has ceased (into the human brain), conscious awareness increases massively as a consequence.…so much so that the brain gains additional potential to see serial numbers on the top of operating room lights, then I will acknowledge you might be right.

However, currently (again) you are talking complete bollocks, Steve.

If you can find me a study which demonstrates that after blood flow has ceased (into the human brain), conscious awareness increases massively as a consequence.…so much so that the brain gains additional potential to see serial numbers on the top of operating room lights, then I will acknowledge you might be right.

However, currently (again) you are talking complete bollocks, Steve.

That's not the point. The point you've been making for years is brain function stops almost instantly once blood stops going to the brain. The study I linked finds otherwise.

Thanks Tim. I’m a bit surprised to hear there may be no success criteria to be satisfied so that the study would be accepted as valid. Perhaps we’re talking at cross-purposes. At least if there weren’t it couldn’t be said to have failed lol.

There is a very simple measure of the success of AWARE. It goes by the name AWARE II.

Recall how at the introduction (was that back in 2008 or so?) Parnia said that in about three years they would have an outcome. which he predicted would be that the phenomenon would turn out to be a hallucination. Clearly that prediction was out in more than one way. First, it didn't turn out to be a hallucination. Second, even the original study took more than three years. However, had the original study turned up nothing at all, there would have been no justification for a follow-up study. There are also studies in non-English-speaking countries which we tend to hear much less about.

It did seem rather ambitious (I went through this stage myself in my early 20s) to assume that one could very quickly and easily resolve a topic which has been one of the questions humans have debated since the dawn of history. I myself believed I had the problem solved and was going to tell the world, and that would have been that. The fact is, others have performed that role, and done it rather better than I would have. The real problem in that the world largely prefers not to listen.

There is a very simple measure of the success of AWARE. It goes by the name AWARE II.

Recall how at the introduction (was that back in 2009 or so?) Parnia said that in about three years they would have an outcome. which he predicted would be that the phenomenon would turn out to be a hallucination. Clearly that prediction was out in more than one way. First, it didn't turn out to be a hallucination. Second, even the original study took more than three years. However, had the original study turned up nothing at all, there would have been no justification for a follow-up study. There are also studies in non-English-speaking countries which we tend to hear much less about.

It did seem rather ambitious (I went through this stage myself in my early 20s) to assume that one could very quickly and easily resolve a topic which has been one of the questions humans have debated since the dawn of history. I myself believed I had the problem solved and was going to tell the world, and that would have been that. The fact is, others have performed that role, and done it rather better than I would have. The real problem in that the world largely prefers not to listen.

Ah right. So the objective of the first study is to show NDEs are not hallucinations. Did I understand that correctly? I can understand then that one might reach a conclusion that they are not hallucinations.

As for resolving the question as to what they are (as opposed to what they’re not) I agree that’s a difficult one to do for the general case and also for specific cases given the circumstances in which they occur.

Like a lot of evidence in life, if there is a way to interpret it that suits my own model, people tend to do that in my experience. I remain amazed that so few seem to realise the importance of the evidence and the quality of it.

Ah right. So the objective of the first study is to show NDEs are not hallucinations. Did I understand that correctly? I can understand then that one might reach a conclusion that they are not hallucinations.

Well, that was my paraphrasing from memory of a few words from a much longer presentation, or series of presentations from September 2008, made to the United Nations, no less.

Perhaps if you'd like a more formal statement, consult the paper itself:
AWARE — AWAreness during REsuscitation — A prospective study
Quote from above paper:

The primary aim of this study was to examine the incidence of awareness and the broad range of mental experiences during resuscitation. The secondary aim was to investigate the feasibility of establishing a novel methodology to test the accuracy of reports of visual and auditory perception and awareness during CA.

p.s. Obiwan, you've been around these forums long enough to have seen all this before. Shouldn't you be answering questions, rather than asking them?

Well, that was my paraphrasing from memory of a few words from a much longer presentation, or series of presentations from September 2008, made to the United Nations, no less.

Perhaps if you'd like a more formal statement, consult the paper itself:
AWARE — AWAreness during REsuscitation — A prospective study
Quote from above paper:


p.s. Obiwan, you've been around these forums long enough to have seen all this before. Shouldn't you be answering questions, rather than asking them?

Thanks Typoz 
I try only to answer when I think I have something to add - hence I don’t comment an awful lot . I find the more I read the more questions I have.

NDEs, although of interest to me, are not a subject I know much about. Certainly nowhere near as much as tim and others.

Thank you for the link it’s useful. Having read it, I’d say it’s not the kind of study that can fail per se and it wasn’t intended to show anything other than people appear to remember/be aware of things when it would seem they should not have been able to. In other words to formally investigate what people have been reporting anecdotally for a long time.

That's not the point. The point you've been making for years is brain function stops almost instantly once blood stops going to the brain. The study I linked finds otherwise.

You didn't link to a study. You just made a loose reference to 'a study' you'd obviously heard about and thought supported your desperate materialist position. I presented you with the study I thought you were referring to and you say it's not the right one. Okay, therefore, it must be this one which also doesn't support what you seem to think it does. 

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full.../ana.25147

These patients were brain dead and the study was an attempt to use that opportunity (which unfortunately presented itself) to monitor/track the deterioration in the viability of brain cells after blood flow has ceased.  Nothing to do with electrical activity commensurate with consciousness.    

"Experimentally, injury to central neurons begins only with anoxic depolarization. This potentially reversible, spreading wave typically starts 2 to 5 minutes after the onset of severe ischemia, marking the onset of a toxic intraneuronal change that eventually results in irreversible injury. 

What you may have heard and misunderstood (as you always seem to do) is mischievous journalists assuming the brain activity they were referring to after death was some kind of consciousness. No, the activity was the potential viability of the brain cells...   

Methods
To investigate this in the human brain, we performed recordings with either subdural electrode strips (n = 4) or intraparenchymal electrode arrays (n = 5) in patients with devastating brain injury that resulted in activation of a Do Not Resuscitate–Comfort Care order followed by terminal extubation. 

Patients undergoing invasive neuromonitoring were enrolled at Charité–Universitätsmedizin Berlin (n = 4) and the University of Cincinnati Medical Center (n = 5) in research protocols approved by the local ethics committees; written informed consent was obtained from the patients' legally authorized representatives. Research was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki

………..Spontaneous brain activity had ceased in response to the barbiturate thiopental several hours before the circulatory arrest. (In other words the patients were also heavily anaesthetised (just in case) before life support was withdrawn to begin the experiment)

 I hope this clears up your confusion, Steve. Why on earth you would jump to such ludicrous assumptions is beyond me but I must say, I am fed up with having to continually explain this kind of thing to you.

You didn't link to a study. You just made a loose reference to 'a study' you'd obviously heard about and thought supported your desperate materialist position. I presented you with the study I thought you were referring to and you say it's not the right one. Okay, therefore, it must be this one which also doesn't support what you seem to think it does. 

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full.../ana.25147

These patients were brain dead and the study was an attempt to use that opportunity (which unfortunately presented itself) to monitor/track the deterioration in the viability of brain cells after blood flow has ceased.  Nothing to do with electrical activity commensurate with consciousness.    

"Experimentally, injury to central neurons begins only with anoxic depolarization. This potentially reversible, spreading wave typically starts 2 to 5 minutes after the onset of severe ischemia, marking the onset of a toxic intraneuronal change that eventually results in irreversible injury. 

What you may have heard and misunderstood (as you always seem to do) is mischievous journalists assuming the brain activity they were referring to after death was some kind of consciousness. No, the activity was the potential viability" of the brain cells...   

Methods
To investigate this in the human brain, we performed recordings with either subdural electrode strips (n = 4) or intraparenchymal electrode arrays (n = 5) in patients with devastating brain injury that resulted in activation of a Do Not Resuscitate–Comfort Care order followed by terminal extubation. 

Patients undergoing invasive neuromonitoring were enrolled at Charité–Universitätsmedizin Berlin (n = 4) and the University of Cincinnati Medical Center (n = 5) in research protocols approved by the local ethics committees; written informed consent was obtained from the patients' legally authorized representatives. Research was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki

………..Spontaneous brain activity had ceased in response to the barbiturate thiopental several hours before the circulatory arrest. (In other words the patients were also heavily anaesthetised (just in case) before life support was withdrawn to begin the experiment)

 I hope this clears up your confusion, Steve. Why on earth you would jump to such ludicrous assumptions is beyond me but I must say, I am fed up with having to continually explain this kind of thing to you.

I'm bowing out for the time being because your faith is too watertight.

I'm bowing out for the time being because your faith is too watertight.

Clearly not as watertight as yours.