1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Afterlife Forums is an online, interactive community designed to give seekers direct access to prominent researchers, to afterlife literature, and to one another in order to foster both spiritual growth and public interest in life after death.

Sam Parnia update:No afterlife :(

Discussion in 'General Afterlife Discussions' started by Filip, Feb 15, 2014.

  1. Here is a very interesting article
    i found on what happens when people die to their bodies!

    From it,the excerpt that follows is on the research conducted by Dr Sam Parnia:
    During the AHA meeting, Dr. Sam Parnia, head of intensive care at Stony Brook University Hospital in New York, reported early results of a 25-hospital study of how frequently cardiac arrest survivors see or hear things while their hearts are stopped. Of 152 survivors interviewed, 37 percent said they had recollections from the unconscious period. Only two recalled actually seeing events and one described any events that could be verified. None saw images mounted in the treatment room as part of the experiment.

    Still, there's evidence that dying brains can remain active. In August, researchers at the University of Michigan reported on brain studies of rats dying from induced cardiac arrest and suffocation. They found that within the first 30 seconds after death, all the rats displayed a surge of brain activity. The rodents' brains showed consciousness that exceeded levels normally found in the animals when they're awake.


    Therefore,no hits for Sam Parnia! I think we should really worry now about the validity of NDEs... :(
     
  2. mac

    mac senior member Staff Member

    NDEs are simply that - experiences of individuals who appeared near to death. They neither validate nor negate the concept of life-after-death, the survival of our corporeal death.

    They've caught the public imagination recently and may be a useful step for some to investigate the notion of survival but they may also become the sole focus for others.

    Kinda like some folk seek out the fun and fantasy surrounding the sometimes spectacular phenomena produced during physical mediumship - witnessing phenomena may become more important than the message behind the mediumship being demonstrated.

    NDEs don't provide evidence of survival and neither do physical phenomena.
     
  3. janef

    janef Moderator

    The AWARE study (AWAreness during REsuscitation) is a multi-hospital clinical study of the brain and consciousness during cardiac arrest, including tests of the validity of perceptions during the out-of-body portion of near-death experiences. The latest status is that more data and larger scale studies will probably be required, and an end to the study is not anticipated in the near future. A report of preliminary results from the first five years of the study is likely this fall, to be presented through a scientific journal or a scientific conference.

    "In the meantime, Dr. Sam Parnia, Director of the AWARE study, has written a new book, Erasing Death: The science that is rewriting the boundaries between life and death, to be released in February. The book reveals that death is not a moment in time, but rather a process that can be interrupted well after it has begun. Dr. Parnia reveals how some form of "afterlife" may be uniquely ours, as evidenced by the continuation of the human mind and psyche after the brain stops functioning."
     
    Last edited: Feb 15, 2014
  4. If I wasn't so lazy I would type up or scan and post the conclusion to Frazer's lecture on afterlife beliefs of primitive tribes delivered at a university in England around 1910. Something to the effect of, "Ours is the only culture in the history of mankind that questions whether an afterlife exists. To all other primitive cultures studied it's a fact that is plain as day."

    With Lovingkindness (metta),
    vic
     
  5. ravensgate

    ravensgate Active Member

    Another “fine” example of modern reporting, lol. Thanks, Filip. I read the entire article, then I read it again, and it sounded so familiar. Then it hit me why it sounded so familiar. You see, back in November of 2013, I attended a symposium in Dallas, at the Omni hotel, in their ballroom.
    On Wednesday, Nov. 20, I came back home with several papers from the symposium, including the abstract pertaining to Dr. Parnia’ s research update (presentation # 236, session IX). Based on your link, I think the reporter was referring to this very event. Unfortunately the article you provide us with omits to include the conclusion, which reads: “Auditory and/or visual experiences during unconsciousness may be a relatively common phenomenon. Even though these experiences may not reflect the conventionally defined NDE and may be different, they may indicate that consciousness may not cease as expected with cessation of heartbeat during CA” (bold lettering is mine).

    Today, in medicine we still view cessation of heart rhythm and cessation of respiration as clinical death; perhaps we need to revise our definition (I think Dr. Parnia agrees on this). In fairly recent interviews, Dr. Parnia kind of stuck his neck out by stating that “some form of afterlife may be uniquely ours, as evidenced by the continuation of the human mind and psyche after the brain stops functioning”.

    In addition, you may find this interesting also; it is an article pertaining to the argument that NDE experiences are hallucinations. It was published by PLOS, a peer-reviewed journal, and refers to a study conducted in Belgium. It’s a rather long article, but the summary reads,
    In conclusion, the present study shows that NDE memories have more characteristics than any kind of memory of real or imagined events and of other memories of a period of coma or impaired consciousness following an acquired severe brain dysfunction. In our opinion, the presented data demonstrate that NDEs cannot be considered as imagined events.

    As I may have mentioned in the past, this type of argument could go on ad nauseam. If you believe the “evidence” you’ve gathered refutes the survival of consciousness, go with 
     
  6. ravensgate

    ravensgate Active Member

    Ok, forget the bold lettering :D
     
  7. ravensgate

    ravensgate Active Member

    Another “fine” example of modern reporting, lol. Thanks, Filip. I read the entire article, then I read it again, and it sounded so familiar. Then it hit me why it sounded so familiar. You see, back in November of 2013, I attended a symposium in Dallas, at the Omni hotel, in their ballroom.
    On Wednesday, Nov. 20, I came back home with several papers from the symposium, including the abstract pertaining to Dr. Parnia’ s research update (presentation # 236, session IX). Based on your link, I think the reporter was referring to this very event. Unfortunately the article you provide us with omits to include the conclusion, which reads: “Auditory and/or visual experiences during unconsciousness may be a relatively common phenomenon. Even though these experiences may not reflect the conventionally defined NDE and may be different, they may indicate that consciousness may not cease as expected with cessation of heartbeat during CA” (bold lettering is mine).

    Today, in medicine we still view cessation of heart rhythm and cessation of respiration as clinical death; perhaps we need to revise our definition (I think Dr. Parnia agrees on this). In fairly recent interviews, Dr. Parnia kind of stuck his neck out by stating that “some form of afterlife may be uniquely ours, as evidenced by the continuation of the human mind and psyche after the brain stops functioning”.

    In addition, you may find this interesting also; it is an article pertaining to the argument that NDE experiences are hallucinations. It was published by PLOS, a peer-reviewed journal, and refers to a study conducted in Belgium. It’s a rather long article, but the summary reads,
    In conclusion, the present study shows that NDE memories have more characteristics than any kind of memory of real or imagined events and of other memories of a period of coma or impaired consciousness following an acquired severe brain dysfunction. In our opinion, the presented data demonstrate that NDEs cannot be considered as imagined events.

    As I may have mentioned in the past, this type of argument could go on ad nauseam. If you believe the “evidence” you’ve gathered refutes the survival of consciousness, go with it.
     
  8. ravensgate

    ravensgate Active Member

    Why did it post twice? Sorry, double post!
     
  9. Celera

    Celera Active Member

    Yup, we should definitely worry. Move along, nothing to see here.
     
  10. Ravensgate,this article? Which article?? You mean a research by Dr Pim vam Lommel maybe? You forgot the link ;)

    Celera and Mac,NDEs are widely used as a strong evidence for the afterlife! However,this 5-year research conducted by Sam Parnia(who is a believer by the way...)
    is strong evidence that NDEs and OBEs are mere hallucinations,even though he doesn't admit it openly...
    Where is your evidence to show the opposite?
     
  11. mac

    mac senior member Staff Member

    I'm not here to provide you with evidence or promote the opposite.... You don't accept that survival is the case? That's OK by me!
     
  12. bluebird

    bluebird Well-Known Member

    I wouldn't accept one person's opinion, or the conclusion(s) of one study, as proof for or as proof against the afterlife. To me, it doesn't make any sense to do so.

    Honestly, for me, the only way I will know if there's an afterlife is if I get personal proof -- my husband visiting me, or similar. But if you are of a mindset that will let you form an opinion on the matter based on studies, then you really ought to read about the results/findings of a LOT of reputable studies, the opinions of various people from different faiths and outlooks and cultures, etc., before making a determination. Basing your opinion on the findings of one person or study is your right, of course, but I don't see why you would give one person/study so much influence over your beliefs, especially in such an important area and when it's so easy for any one person/study to be influenced by personal bias.
     
  13. mac

    mac senior member Staff Member

    Just to remind you what I wrote:

    NDEs are simply that - experiences of individuals who appeared near to death. They neither validate nor negate the concept of life-after-death, the survival of our corporeal death.

    They've caught the public imagination recently and may be a useful step for some to investigate the notion of survival but they ma.................

    NDEs don't provide evidence of survival and neither do physical phenomena.
     
  14. Filip, just out of curiousity, have you ever had an obe or nde? Most of the people who insist that nde's or obe's are hallucinations have never had one. It is such a personal experience that no one can tell you what it is. It is so profound that it makes you question reality in the deepest sense. And hallucinations do not do that.
     
  15. frith

    frith Member

    Studying a completely random phenomenon and trying to prove is scientifically is going to be extremely difficult. So I wouldn't discount everything from just this one study.

    Think of physicists studying rare atomic particles using incredibly expensive atom smashers and how rare or non-existent their findings are. Then add on contemporary scientific skeptical dogmatic ideology and a lack of any funding or research in this area and you have where we are now in proving or disproving NDEs.
     
    Last edited: Feb 16, 2014
  16. janef

    janef Moderator

    There is plenty of evidence that proves beyond a reasonable doubt that there is an Afterlife. Some people will never believe it unless they experience it for themselves. There also are people that don't believe we have ever stepped on the moon. Fine. But, I am confused why some of you are here on this forum started by Roberta Grimes to discuss the Afterlife, which most here have accepted as the truth. Why don't you move on to a skeptic site?
     
  17. bluebird

    bluebird Well-Known Member

    Speaking for myself -- desperation. Because my husband died, I desperately want proof of the afterlife, proof that he is safe and well and waiting for me in it. I don't need a skeptic site because I am already full of doubt, I don't need more.

    Also, there's nothing wrong with being skeptical; that just means that one is open-minded as to the possibilities, both for and against. Discussing the possibility of the afterlife doesn't necessarily mean that one must believe in its existence. I can discuss Greek and Roman mythology, although I don't believe in their gods. I can discuss the Hollow Earth theory, although I don't believe it has any validity. I can discuss the possibility of god's existence, though I am agnostic on that subject.

    I want there to be an afterlife, but I do not share your view that the existence of one has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. To you, there is no doubt. To me, there is significant doubt.
     
  18. Celera

    Celera Active Member

    I think it's good to engage in conversations with people who hold different views, although it's best done with a mind at least partly open. Hearing the skeptic's arguments and considering why one rejects it is a useful exercise for both writer and reader.

    Filip's specific approach seems to be to throw a link on the board and challenge us to refute it. The links he has chosen have been so transparently illogical that I have only been persuaded to think less of the notable skeptics. I'm not hearing much about his own ideas or experiences, or even his own reasons for finding the skeptical view tenable.

    Others are here presenting their own doubts and fears along with their hopes and a measure of general goodwill. Personally, I welcome such doubters. Some days, I am one of them. But Tossing a link on the board and saying, well, I guess that's it then, is intellectually lazy and appears like an attempt to start a quarrel. It doesn't seem to be working and I expect he'll get bored with it eventually.

    Just my opinion.
     
  19. mac

    mac senior member Staff Member

    On some websites, in some forums, the only thing that some contributors do is to post links - no comment, no opinion, no ideas....

    It's a lazy-ass way as I see things.
     
    Last edited: Feb 18, 2014
  20. janef

    janef Moderator

    I hope you will find reassurance bluebird.... I think you are an open-minded person, my message was not intended for you.
     

Share This Page