What our brain does after death

"Neurologists studying the brains of nine patients as they died have found surprising information about what happens to your brain after it dies.

According to the new study, death is marked by a final wave of electrical activity in our brains called “spreading depression.”

This “spreading depression” is a final flurry of activity that occurs in the brain before it finally shuts down, according to the experts.

The findings suggest that it could be possible to reboot the brain for as long as three to five minutes after a human heart stops beating or ceases to show signs of life.

The study, which was carried out by a team of neurologists including some from the Charité–Universitätsmedizin Berlin, followed nine patients with devastating brain injuries who had Do Not Resuscitate orders. 

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style...32921.html
The word study in the article is a link.

[/ur]http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-5444223/What-happens-brain-minutes-die.html[/url]

"Neurologists studying the brains of nine patients as they died have found surprising information about what happens to your brain after it dies.

According to the new study, death is marked by a final wave of electrical activity in our brains called “spreading depression.”

This “spreading depression” is a final flurry of activity that occurs in the brain before it finally shuts down, according to the experts.

The findings suggest that it could be possible to reboot the brain for as long as three to five minutes after a human heart stops beating or ceases to show signs of life.

The study, which was carried out by a team of neurologists including some from the Charité–Universitätsmedizin Berlin, followed nine patients with devastating brain injuries who had Do Not Resuscitate orders. 

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style...32921.html
The word study in the article is a link.

[/ur]http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-5444223/What-happens-brain-minutes-die.html[/url]

Am I correct in thinking that you believe this has something to do with NDE's, Steve ?  I've had a look through the paper (as a lay person ) and it is basically an attempt to better understand the viability of brain cells after severe ischemia.

The patients were brain dead and  in some cases under anaesthesia but their hearts were still functioning to some degree until life support was withdrawn. When that occurred, invasive measurements were taken of the viability of cells in order to better understand how long brain cells can survive (without bursting) after complete ischemia. (I think that's about right if not apologies)

Nothing to do with consciousness or electrical activity in the brain.  My computer is currently turning blue screen with regularity so I probably won't be able to respond  until next Thursday if you come back with a disagreement. Just to let you know, I'm still here.

Am I correct in thinking that you believe this has something to do with NDE's, Steve ?  I've had a look through the paper (as a lay person ) and it is basically an attempt to better understand the viability of brain cells after severe ischemia.

The patients were brain dead and  in some cases under anaesthesia but their hearts were still functioning to some degree until life support was withdrawn. When that occurred, invasive measurements were taken of the viability of cells in order to better understand how long brain cells can survive (without bursting) after complete ischemia. (I think that's about right if not apologies)

Nothing to do with consciousness or electrical activity in the brain.  My computer is currently turning blue screen with regularity so I probably won't be able to respond  until next Thursday if you come back with a disagreement. Just to let you know, I'm still here.

I read through it yesterday and that was generally similar to my impression as well

@Steve

I thought you might have been back by now to respond to the comments on your article/study that you posted. I recently had quite a lengthy exchange in the comments section of a you tube video, which was also trumpeting a smaller study (on the same subject) as a plausible explanation for near death experiences.

It was one of the most infuriating clashes I have ever had with badly informed pseudo-sceptics, who try to influence the debate around NDE's by posting outdated/refuted proposals and old 'red herrings.'  After my initial response, politely trying to point them in the direction of the relevant research, they flatly refused to accept it, or my word that the author of the study they were citing, had made a clear statement of retraction about what could be ascertained from it (absolutely nothing). They even said I was pulling cr#p from my a##e (apologies to readers for relaying that)

Unbelievably, they eventually posted me a link to Dr Sam Parnia's research as a trump card in support of their position that NDE's are simply confabulations or tricks of the brain. How could they be so incredibly stupid ? 

The number of nincompoops (they describe themselves as rational and scientific BTW) who post garbage on the net, trying to discredit NDE's, is substantial. The study you've posted, Steve will quite soon, I'm sure, find it's way to the idiots I've just made reference to. 

Does that give you a sense of satisfaction ?

@Steve

I thought you might have been back by now to respond to the comments on your article/study that you posted. I recently had quite a lengthy exchange in the comments section of a you tube video, which was also trumpeting a smaller study (on the same subject) as a plausible explanation for near death experiences.

It was one of the most infuriating clashes I have ever had with badly informed pseudo-sceptics, who try to influence the debate around NDE's by posting outdated/refuted proposals and old 'red herrings.'  After my initial response, politely trying to point them in the direction of the relevant research, they flatly refused to accept it, or my word that the author of the study they were citing, had made a clear statement of retraction about what could be ascertained from it (absolutely nothing). They even said I was pulling cr#p from my a##e (apologies to readers for relaying that)

Unbelievably, they eventually posted me a link to Dr Sam Parnia's research as a trump card in support of their position that NDE's are simply confabulations or tricks of the brain. How could they be so incredibly stupid ? 

The number of nincompoops (they describe themselves as rational and scientific BTW) who post garbage on the net, trying to discredit NDE's, is substantial. The study you've posted, Steve will quite soon, I'm sure, find it's way to the idiots I've just made reference to. 

Does that give you a sense of satisfaction ?

Have you a link to the video/exchanges?

Have you a link to the video/exchanges?

I could link to it but I'm not going to. It's not something I would want to stick up on a forum but the exchange happened exactly like I said. I'm quite willing to copy it and send it to one of the moderators so that they can verify it.

Unbelievably, they eventually posted me a link to Dr Sam Parnia's research as a trump card in support of their position that NDE's are simply confabulations or tricks of the brain.

Elsewhere, I've often seen Parnia dismissed as a crank or a quack. It seems some people want to have things both ways, as it suits them.

Practically though, such debates are unlikely to get anyone who is strongly-committed to change their mind. But simply getting these things talked about is valuable in itself. Some people may then follow up with their own research as a result.

Still, I respect you for getting involved in such discussions, I mostly just watch from the sidelines.

Elsewhere, I've often seen Parnia dismissed as a crank or a quack. It seems some people want to have things both ways, as it suits them.

Practically though, such debates are unlikely to get anyone who is strongly-committed to change their mind. But simply getting these things talked about is valuable in itself. Some people may then follow up with their own research as a result.

Still, I respect you for getting involved in such discussions, I mostly just watch from the sidelines.

Thanks, Typoz

I try to stay out as much as possible but sometimes I can't resist especially when I know they are posting absolute horseshit. It doesn't get you anywhere though, of course. The most infuriating aspect is that what I was trying to get across to them was simply the facts as far as we are aware at this stage. 

I didn't go in saying life after death has been proved or consciousness is definitely a separate entity (though I believe it is), just that the only research that really matters now (as far as answering the big question)  is the study of cardiac arrest patients.  And they're talking about oxygen deprivation etc. 

It's not the proponents who are ill informed and deluded, it's nearly always those styling themselves as sceptics who are.
They're also intellectually dishonest and cynical about the strength (and amount) of the evidence.