Upcoming interview with Dr. Bruce Greyson

I don't suppose there are any further updates on this? I would be very curious to see Dr. Greyson elaborate on his participation in this study and his opinion on its conclusions.

I'm not too sure where else I should post this but I was informed via email several months ago by Dr Ed Kelly of the UVA that Bruce Greyson is working on his magnum opus, a new book summarising much of his work up to now titled After. It is expected to be a bestseller. If this interview goes ahead, it would be interesting to discuss this with him.

Last time I have contacted Greyson on the 6th March, 2020. He said that he is still very busy.

We agreed that, if he won't send me his answers earlier, I will contact him again on 6th September 2020.

Meanwhile, had tried to contact Jason Jorjani for the interview. Twice.

Both times he didn't respond. Sad.

I have just checked Amazon and found that Bruce Greyson's book is seemingly near-completion, if not finished already, and is expected to be released on 4th March 2021.

So as an update on his work, someone mentioned on the AwareofAWARE blog that Bruce Greyson's new book has, despite this release date, already been reviewed and praised by several big names in NDEs. Probably the most impressive comes from none other than Sam Parnia himself:

“Bruce Greyson is undoubtedly one of the world’s foremost authorities in the field of near-death experiences.   Where some have limited themselves to opinions without scientific experimentation, Dr. Greyson has patiently and thoroughly applied a scientific and systematic approach to exploring and unraveling the mystery of near-death experiences.   Now after four decades, Dr Greyson shares his tremendous knowledge and insights, which have been gained through his work as a professor of psychiatry and the study of near-death experiences, with the wider public. [b]His work in engaging, appealing, and thoroughly informative. An absolute must read for anyone who has ever contemplated the question of what happens when we die.”[/b]—Sam Parnia, M.D., Ph.D., Director of Critical Care & Resuscitation Research, New York University Langone Medical Center, author of [i]What Happens When We Die?[/i]

This makes me curious at to when exactly Dr Parnia wrote this review. Was this before or during AWARE II? This could potentially be a positive sign, I'm not sure, but given Bruce Greyson's stance on NDEs and how Parnia praises him here, it does make me wonder...

Also, I'm not sure if this has been brought up here, but Dr Greyson now has an official website of his own which includes his email: https://www.brucegreyson.com

Edit: Updated with Parnia's full review.

What Parnia's review means (IMHO) is that it's becoming vanishingly unlikely that a materialistic/physiological explanation for NDE is likely to be found, or else he surely wouldn't have endorsed the book (Parnia isn't naive) Not impossible of course, we can't say that, at least not in the spirit of good science. 

But there's only two possible outcomes of the research. (No one can seriously doubt anymore that NDE's are real experiences with real effects).  One is that NDE's are produced by the brain and the other is that they're not. 

One day (it may take another decade at least who knows), he or his co-researchers should have enough evidence to finally sway the argument conclusively, one way or the other. If it all goes to plan.

What Parnia's review means (IMHO) is that it's becoming vanishingly unlikely that a materialistic/physiological explanation for NDE is likely to be found, or else he surely wouldn't have endorsed the book (Parnia isn't naive) Not impossible of course, we can't say that, at least not in the spirit of good science. 

But there's only two possible outcomes of the research. (No one can seriously doubt anymore that NDE's are real experiences with real effects).  One is that NDE's are produced by the brain and the other is that they're not. 

One day (it may take another decade at least who knows), he or his co-researchers should have enough evidence to finally sway the argument conclusively, one way or the other. If it all goes to plan.

That sounds reasonable to me. But this also seems to help reduce speculation regarding Parnia's position/stance on NDEs as it stands. Such a positive review heavily implies in my opinion that he agrees with Greyson, and it's nice to know Parnia is now probably even more well-informed on veridical NDEs than he was before. It might be exciting to think that Parnia wrote this review during AWARE II (which is quite plausible and possible) and is confident about something that has encouraged such a glowing review.

I think Sam Parnia has different positions depending on context. His personal view seems based on lots of cases which would not appear in any formal study. It's much the same with hospice workers or those dealing with people on the border between life and death. People tend to reach a personal understanding of these things. But what appears in formal studies such as AWARE or AWARE II will only ever be a small subset of that knowledge. Pinning things down in a formal way is a different activity. I wouldn't make any pre-emptive guess as to what sort of results they might be getting.

But one thing is very clear, from something Parnia said years ago (was it in 2008?) if the initial study came up with no results, there would be no reason to continue. The mere fact that studies are ongoing shows that there are plenty of interesting observations - but in my view not necessarily formalised at this stage.

I think Sam Parnia has different positions depending on context. His personal view seems based on lots of cases which would not appear in any formal study. It's much the same with hospice workers or those dealing with people on the border between life and death. People tend to reach a personal understanding of these things. But what appears in formal studies such as AWARE or AWARE II will only ever be a small subset of that knowledge. Pinning things down in a formal way is a different activity. I wouldn't make any pre-emptive guess as to what sort of results they might be getting.

But one thing is very clear, from something Parnia said years ago (was it in 2008?) if the initial study came up with no results, there would be no reason to continue. The mere fact that studies are ongoing shows that there are plenty of interesting observations - but in my view not necessarily formalised at this stage.

Pinning things down in a formal way is a different activity.

I wouldn't make any pre-emptive guess as to what sort of results they might be getting. 

Precisely. The next phase of the study will probably begin in a year or so. They really need to get the numbers up somehow but the new cool study should provide some really interesting data.

That sounds reasonable to me. But this also seems to help reduce speculation regarding Parnia's position/stance on NDEs as it stands. Such a positive review heavily implies in my opinion that he agrees with Greyson, and it's nice to know Parnia is now probably even more well-informed on veridical NDEs than he was before. It might be exciting to think that Parnia wrote this review during AWARE II (which is quite plausible and possible) and is confident about something that has encouraged such a glowing review.

We just have to wait and see, Omni.

Little update. I recently emailed Dr Greyson yesterday and he responded suprisingly quickly, as well as being being aware of a previous email I'd sent him and he also responded to those queries, so he should be able to respond faster now. This is a transcription of (the relevant parts) of his email in regards to recent events and his book: 

The coronavirus pandemic has complicated life for me as it has for everyone else, and I don’t get to my office or to my e-mail very often. Actually, my UVA e-mail address is probably the best one to reach me at. Although I can’t check it very often, I am able to access it more frequently than my gmail account...

...The good news is that those people who adhere so strongly to materialism are no longer in the majority of scientists. I write in my book After about three recent surveys in different countries that find more than half of scientists and more than half of physicians believe that mind and brain are two separate things and that the brain does not create our thoughts

He addresses an article made by John Martin Fischer as well, who seemed to stab the Skeptiko members in the back when he promised them to actually debate with Dr Long (Long informed me via email that Fischer has done no such thing since 2019), from January that was trying to refute NDEs, which resulted in an enormous amount of criticism thrown his way, including from the likes of Dr Jan Holden, who commented on his New York Times opinion piece. Notably, the NYT article decided to pin the comment that basically amounted to 'religion bad, nihilism good', rather than the many criticisms that received support. To me, that shows just where the NYT's agenda lies. 

Edit: I have removed possibly confidential and private information reserved for Greyson's interview and own thoughts. He also discusses how the book will detail his own personal journey and how he became convinced of the genuine nature of NDEs.