Does consciousness survive death? A BBC investigation.

[pftest]

The focus should be whether real memories formed while there was no brain function. Has this claim been published in a reputable journal or not?

This is from the lancet study:

Several theories have been proposed to explain NDE. We did not show that psychological, neurophysiological, or physiological factors caused these experiences after cardiac arrest. Sabom22 mentions a young American woman who had complications during brain surgery for a cerebral aneurysm. The EEG of her cortex and brainstem had become totally flat. After the operation, which was eventually successful, this patient proved to have had a very deep NDE, including an out-of-body experience, with subsequently verified observations during the period of the flat EEG.

http://profezie3m.altervista.org/archivio/TheLancet_NDE.htm

 

[nismaratwork]

The best that does is challenge our assumptions about the process of brain death, rather than your more, "on-off" binary view. This is not new, and in the context of a prospective study in which one reports... is not impressive.

Oh well... people want to believe...

 

[Forestman]

Pftest, thank you for posting that.

 

[nismaratwork]

Pftest, thank you for posting that.

Why?

 

[Forestman]

The quote from the study that he showed talked about how a particular woman had perceptions when she showed no measurable brain activity. Its an example of why the theory that the mind comes from matter cannot explain everything that happens with the mind.

If you watch the video that I posted at the beginning, not the very first one though, but the ones that You Tube shows that are next then you can watch about this particular woman. Also on this movie there is one part that talks about a theory of consciousness that states that the mind might result from quantum superposition in the microtubuals(might not be spelled right) of the neurons.

 

[nismaratwork]

The quote from the study that he showed talked about how a particular woman had perceptions when she showed no measurable brain activity. Its an example of why the theory that the mind comes from matter cannot explain everything that happens with the mind.

If you watch the video that I posted at the beginning, not the very first one though, but the ones that You Tube shows that are next then you can watch about this particular woman. Also on this movie there is one part that talks about a theory of consciousness that states that the mind might result from quantum superposition in the microtubuals(might not be spelled right) of the neurons.

Ahhh... the Penrose view, I see... although I don't subscribe to it.

I appreciate your use of "no measureable" rather than "none" by the way... it's far more accurate and telling. My concern here above all is that, "Sabom22 mentions a young American woman who had complications during brain surgery for a cerebral aneurysm...". That's the kind of thing I need more than a mention of, I'd need to see some evidence that rules out obvious malfunctions or misinterprations.

I'm also curious why, when they believed that she was clinically dead, that they would continue the surgery.

 

[Evo]

The quote from the study that he showed talked about how a particular woman had perceptions when she showed no measurable brain activity. Its an example of why the theory that the mind comes from matter cannot explain everything that happens with the mind.

If you watch the video that I posted at the beginning, not the very first one though, but the ones that You Tube shows that are next then you can watch about this particular woman. Also on this movie there is one part that talks about a theory of consciousness that states that the mind might result from quantum superposition in the microtubuals(might not be spelled right) of the neurons.

There is no evidence that she had any thoughts while her EEG was flat (and there is now proof that significant brain activity occurs that an EEG cannot detect, this is from fMRI's). The fMRI can spot where the braion activity is in response to questions or stmului. We know from studies which parts of the brain show activity in response to certain functions. She most likely hallucinated before or after the surgery. Of course she will only remember it after she comes out of the procedure.

 

[Forestman]

There is no evidence that she had any thoughts while her EEG was flat (and there is now proof that significant brain activity occurs that an EEG cannot detect, this is from fMRI's). The fMRI can spot where the brain activity is in response to questions or stmului. We know from studies which parts of the brain show activity in response to certain functions. She most likely hallucinated before or after the surgery. Of course she will only remember it after she comes out of the procedure.

That would be unlikely because she was able to describe the special instruments that were used in her operation, and she was able to repeat conversations that she over heard while out of her body, which was at a time when she had no brain activity, or blood in her brain.

 

[nismaratwork]

That would be unlikely because she was able to describe the special instruments that were used in her operation, and she was able to repeat conversations that she over heard while out of her body, which was at a time when she had no brain activity, or blood in her brain.

If she had no oxygen whatsoever in her brain, she would be dead, apoptisis would be rampant and catastrophic. You NEVER lose blood volume like that to the entire brain, and live.

MEG in addition to what Evo said, also shows that EEG is hardly a magical device to detect all activity.

 

[Forestman]

Ahhh... the Penrose view, I see... although I don't subscribe to it.

I appreciate your use of "no measureable" rather than "none" by the way... it's far more accurate and telling. My concern here above all is that, "Sabom22 mentions a young American woman who had complications during brain surgery for a cerebral aneurysm...". That's the kind of thing I need more than a mention of, I'd need to see some evidence that rules out obvious malfunctions or misinterprations.

I'm also curious why, when they believed that she was clinically dead, that they would continue the surgery.

She was made clinically dead on purpose, it was called operation standstill. It was done in order to remove the aneurysm. Her heart was stopped from beating, her lungs were stopped from breathing, and the blood was drained from her head. To prevent her body from decaying she was chilled down in temperature.

 

[Forestman]

If she had no oxygen whatsoever in her brain, she would be dead, apoptisis would be rampant and catastrophic. You NEVER lose blood volume like that to the entire brain, and live.

MEG in addition to what Evo said, also shows that EEG is hardly a magical device to detect all activity.

Her whole body was kept cold in order to stop her cells from breaking down.

 

[Evo]

That would be unlikely because she was able to describe the special instruments that were used in her operation, and she was able to repeat conversations that she over heard while out of her body, which was at a time when she had no brain activity, or blood in her brain.

Everyone knows the instruments in an operating room. Like I said, I woke up during several operations and heard and saw what was going on before I went back under. I also heard the doctor in my last operation telling them that I wouldn't remember. I am not saying that it's impossible that she had an OBE, but diving over the cliff to believing without question or proof is over the top.

 

[nismaratwork]

She was made clinically dead on purpose, it was called operation standstill. It was done in order to remove the aneurysm. Her heart was stopped from beating, her lungs were stopped from breathing, and the blood was drained from her head. To prevent her body from decaying she was chilled down in temperature.

All of what you say is true, but that isn't the loss of all oxygen to the brain, just the supply. The hypothermic treatment slows apoptosis, but slows ALL activity, making an EEG a questionable measure.

The rest of her body being 'dead' is merely a formality until the brain follows, and the sign of that is apoptosis of neurons. It's not preventing decay exactly, but this pre-programmed cell-death/suicide...

Again, I'm not seeing any kind of control her that assures she didn't learn of her operation through secondary means, along with memories of what was said during the operation. Remember, it does seem that hearing lingers even as the brain begins to 'shut down'.

Mainly, the issue is not that this didn't happen, but that it's just an illustration of the complexity of dying, much as sleep and consciousness are not always clear. This is only amazing if you presuppose that she was dead... she wasn't.

 

[nismaratwork]

Everyone knows the instruments in an operating room. Like I said, I woke up during several operations and heard and saw what was going on before I went back under. I also heard the doctor in my last operation telling them that I wouldn't remember.

Isn't that fun? "Hemostat... she'll.. don't worry..."


Oh yes, anesthesia is an art, more than a science...

 

[Forestman]

Here is a clip from the movie.

Anyway this is happening after she has been put under clinical death.

The small little Christian part at the front was not part of the original movie.

 

[Evo]

Here is a clip from the movie.

Anyway this is happening after she has been put under clinical death.

The small little Christian part at the front was not part of the original movie.

Now she's talking about a light pulling her as she stood looking at herself. In an earlier video, she said she felt someone (a nurse) was standing next to her talking, no light.

 

[Forestman]

Those were from two different parts of the movie, the link that I just posted was not the same link that I posted at the beginning of the thread. They are all from the same movie, but from different parts, and dealt with different people. The first clip did deal with a lady who was once a nurse, and then this clip that I just posted dealt with Pam Reynolds.

Here is another part of the movie, and it deals with Roger Penrose's theory on consciousness.

 

[Evo]

Those were from two different parts of the movie, the link that I just posted was not the same link that I posted at the beginning of the thread. They are all from the same movie, but from different parts, and dealt with different people. The first clip did deal with a lady who was once a nurse, and then this clip that I just posted dealt with Pam Reynolds.

Here is another part of the movie, and it deals with Roger Penrose's theory on consciousness.

I'm talking about videos about her that I looked up on my own. Her story has changed over time. I've learned that there is no sense in arguing with those that have already drunk the koolaid. So, if you choose to believe this, there's nothing I can say to make you see it objectively. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make them drink.

 

[Forestman]

I apologize.

 

[Evo]

I apologize.

No need. You believe what you believe. You may be right, you may be wrong, no one can say you are wrong, or that you are right. My own mother swears she had an OBE as a child and she rememebrs it clearly and it sounds convincing. According to her, psychic abilities run in our family and I myself have had experiences, witnessed by others, that defy rational explanation. But I remain open to the thought that there is a rational explanation. I have yet to hear a rational explanation that makes sense, especially since I wasn't the only witness to some events.

 

[MacLaddy]

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make them drink.

Have you ever considered that the statement above could go both ways?

To me the the speculation that there may be cognizant brain activity while an EEG is flat-lined is completely absurd. How could these dynamic memories be created with no measurable brain activity at all, when we know that brain activity even while sleeping has measurable results?

With that said, I agree with Evo that these memories must occur before going under, or while coming to. It would all amount to the same thing in the individuals recollection.

 

[Forestman]

Well I don't completely base my belief in the survival of consciousness on NDE's, but on a lot of things. (Not religious beliefs though. Those I don't have.) And while much of it is anecdotal, I have seen enough to convince me.

I guess I see the brain as like a radio, and the mind is like the radio waves. Even after the radio is destroyed their are still radio waves.

 

[pftest]

Another relevant paper:

Very little is known about the dying process and in particular the state of the human mind at the end of life. Cardiac arrest is the final step in the dying process irrespective of cause, and is also the closest physiological model of the dying process. Recent studies in cardiac arrest survivors have indicated that although the majority of cardiac arrest survivors have no memory recall from the event, nevertheless approximately 10% develop memories that are consistent with typical near death experiences. These include an ability to ‘see’ and recall specific detailed descriptions of the resuscitation, as verified by resuscitation staff. Many studies in humans and animals have indicated that brain function ceases during cardiac arrest, thus raising the question of how such lucid, well-structured thought processes with reasoning and memory formation can occur at such a time. This has led to much interest as regards the potential implications for the study of consciousness and its relationship with the brain, which still remains an enigma. In this article, we will review published research examining brain physiology and function during cardiac arrest as well as its potential relationship with near death experiences during this time. Finally, we will explore the contribution that near death experiences during cardiac arrest may make to the wider understanding of human consciousness.
http://www.resuscitationjournal.com/article/S0300-9572(01)00469-5/abstract
full text: http://folk.uio.no/benjamil/neardeath/neardeath3.pdf

 

[Forestman]

Thanks pftest.

 

[pftest]

No problemo.
And here are some quotes from Parnia:

Near-death experiences have been reported for centuries but in Parnia's study none of the patients were found to have received low oxygen levels, which some skeptics believe may contribute to the phenomenon.

When the brain is deprived of oxygen people become totally confused, thrash around and usually have no memories at all, Parnia said. "Here you have a severe insult to the brain but perfect memory."

Skeptics have also suggested that patients' memories occurred in the moments they were leaving or returning to consciousness. But Parnia said when a brain is traumatized by a seizure or car wreck a patient generally does not remember moments just before or after losing consciousness.

Rather, there is usually a memory lapse of hours or days. "Talk to them. They'll tell you something like: 'I just remember seeing the car and the next thing I knew I was in the hospital,"' he said.

"With cardiac arrest, the insult to the brain is so severe it stops the brain completely. Therefore, I would expect profound memory loss before and after the incident," he added.

Since the initial experiment, Parnia and his colleagues have found more than 3,500 people with lucid memories that apparently occurred at times they were thought to be clinically dead.
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=98447&page=2

 

[JaredJames]

That would be unlikely because she was able to describe the special instruments that were used in her operation, and she was able to repeat conversations that she over heard while out of her body, which was at a time when she had no brain activity, or blood in her brain.

Were there controls set down to remove any possibility of outside influence / check for previous knowledge?

Here is a clip from the movie.

Anyway this is happening after she has been put under clinical death.

The small little Christian part at the front was not part of the original movie.

Movies, movies and more movies. I'm awaiting the documented evidence under controlled circumstances. Still far too much anecdote.

To me the the speculation that there may be cognizant brain activity while an EEG is flat-lined is completely absurd.

Skip back a few posts and you'll see the discussion regarding EEG not being accurate enough to detect all activity.

How could these dynamic memories be created with no measurable brain activity at all, when we know that brain activity even while sleeping has measurable results?

Again, EEG isn't accurate enough. No measurable =/= none.

 

[JaredJames]

Another relevant paper:

The paper may be, but that quote isn't.

What you quoted was the abstract which simply points out what has been noted - namely people saying things which others have 'confirmed' and not what they have discovered.

Again, without controls this "confirmation by others" means nothing. It's all anecdotal.

The conclusion to that study is of interest, not the abstract which simply details what they were studying - in this case the reports.

What you have done here is back up your point by using the same point, not by providing supporting evidence.

So does anyone have access to the full text?

 

[JaredJames]

And while much of it is anecdotal, I have seen enough to convince me.

You need to understand, anecdote =/= evidence. Anecdotes are subject to extreme bias from humans and are not valid.

As much as I like your way of trying to get through this, you are basing far too much on what people say and not what evidence shows. In this case there is little if nothing in the way of evidence.

I guess I see the brain as like a radio, and the mind is like the radio waves. Even after the radio is destroyed their are still radio waves.

This is non-sense. Let's not get too far out of the mainstream.

 

[pftest]

And some more:

http://www.horizonresearch.org/Uploads/medhypothesis.pdf

...people who have had an out of body experience report actually being able to recall specific details of events that had taken place at a time when they had been unconscious. If correct, this would make it unlikely that such experiences are simply illusions even if the trigger for the experience, and hence the neurological intermediary pathway, for such an experience may lie in the temporo-parietal region of the brain.

...

However much of the evidence regarding cerebral function during cardiac arrest indicates that there is a lack of electrical activity in the brain during cardiac arrest.30 This has raised a number of questions regarding the mechanism of causation of cognitive processes and memory during cardiac arrest. It has also raised questions regarding the relationship of the mind and the brain. This is because using current theories of neuroscience this should not be possible.

...

It has been demonstrated that many cardiac arrest survivors may have cognitive processes during the time of their arrest and anecdotally some have also been able to describe accurately verified events during their arrest, indicating the presence of consciousness.

They also compare the longterm results of awareness under anesthesia with those of awareness during cardiac arrest:

Following awareness during general anesthesia, patients report hearing conversations, sensations of paralysis and pain, anxiety, panic and helplessness.27 Subsequent psychological sequelae may arise, with sleep disturbances, nightmares, flashbacks and a preoccupation with death.28 This phenomenon is rare and is thought to arise in less than 1% of patients who undergo general anesthesia, but following its occurrence a longer term post-traumatic stress disorder may also arise.

...

Near death experiences appear to have a long term protective psychological effect, even though many studies have shown that a significant proportion of cardiac arrest survivors may suffer from behavioural, cognitive and emotional disturbances that may begin soon after the cardiac arrest and persist for many years. More work is needed to identify ways of preventing and treating these impairments in cardiac arrest survivors.

 

[thorium1010]

EEg are not always indicative of brain function, states of deep anesthesia or low perfusion could also produce no to little eeg waves.
Any tissue (specially neurons )if damaged from reduced or nill perfusion (cardiac arrests ) tissue death occurs which is irreversible.These cases are called NDE's because once tissue death has occurred it is irreversible. So if a patient has recovered from a similar experience that means brain is still functioning at the time of resuscitation or surgery.

 

[pftest]

The paper may be, but that quote isn't.

What you quoted was the abstract which simply points out what has been noted - namely people saying things which others have 'confirmed' and not what they have discovered.

Again, without controls this "confirmation by others" means nothing. It's all anecdotal.

The conclusion to that study is of interest, not the abstract which simply details what they were studying - in this case the reports.

What you have done here is back up your point by using the same point, not by providing supporting evidence.

So does anyone have access to the full text?

An abstract offers a short description of the content of the paper. I am simply putting some published work forward. Like Ivan said, this isn't an opinions column.

 

[JaredJames]

And some more:

http://www.horizonresearch.org/Uploads/medhypothesis.pdf

They also compare the longterm results of awareness under anesthesia with those of awareness during cardiac arrest:

This is a paper describing a hypothesis. No conclusions, no answers.

Don't take this as attacks at you, I really love your enthusiasm and dedication to this. But, I'm not entirely sure if these items mean anything so far as evidence goes (your previous is very interesting if we could get the paper, but the last I'm not so sure of - being just a hypothesis).

Ideally, we'd have a paper where a thousand people who have gone through this process are subjected to certain experiences (I don't know, perhaps as they die a clown walks through the theatre - we make sure they are blindfolded etc) and they are asked to recall what happened without outside influence / help. That for me would give a definitive answer. Of course, this isn't some simple task to achieve - we can't just put people through this. Far too much risk. So I'm not sure how we'd test it, next to having some scientists and clowns stationed at hospitals waiting for these things to occur.

An abstract offers a short description of the content of the paper. I am simply putting some published work forward. Like Ivan said, this isn't an opinions column.

Certainly, I'm just pointing out that the quote you bolded was simply outlining what they wanted to study and doesn't backup the that it is true.

 

[Forestman]

If she had had blood in her brain I could see how the EEG might be wrong, but since her head was drained of blood I just don't see how she could have had any brain activity. Plus her eyes were taped shut, and her ears had devices in them that emitted clicking sounds. If the NDE is a hallucination, then it is one that requires the whole brain to be functioning. For people have clear thoughts, perceptions, and memories during the experience.

You have made a good point that when you get right down to it, that it is anecdotal in nature. However when you have a lot of the same kinds of anecdotal experiences pointing in the same direction it is very suggestive. I believe in quantum theory, however I have always found it to be wrong that parallel universes, string theory, and other things that are unobservable to modern science are given social acceptance, while massive amounts of suggestive anecdotal data regarding paranormal things is ignored. And by saying this I am not saying that I believe in all paranormal phenomena, for much of it can be explained away. I put no stock in things like astrology, tara cards, crystals, and stuff like that.

My best friend who is a retired anthropology professor used to be very skeptical of these types of things. After once working with Rhine at Duck University, and never seeing any hard evidence he came to the conclusion that there was no evidence for the paranormal. However after looking at the current data even he has changed his mind. I only bring this up to show that there are more people in academics that feel this way than you might realize, but they are to afraid to say anything, for it could jeopardize their careers. As result real studies are never done. And things just remain anecdotal. The reason that Rhine never turned up any useful data was because these types of experiences (I mean all sorts esp abilities) are produced by strong emotion. His methods at the time did not take this into account.

 

[thorium1010]

If she had had blood in her brain I could see how the EEG might be wrong, but since her head was drained of blood I just don't see how she could have had any brain activity. Plus her eyes were taped shut, and her ears had devices in them that emitted clicking sounds. If the NDE is a hallucination, then it is one that requires the whole brain to be functioning. For people have clear thoughts, perceptions, and memories during the experience.

.

If a brain is completely drained of blood a brain won't survive for long , IN this case the temperature was reduced so that the brain activity is reduced which means blood flow also decreases .Its hard to say brain death has occurred , because once brain death has occurred its irreversible.

 

[JaredJames]

If she had had blood in her brain I could see how the EEG might be wrong, but since her head was drained of blood I just don't see how she could have had any brain activity.

Completely drained or just the excess? They aren't the same.

If the NDE is a hallucination, then it is one that requires the whole brain to be functioning. For people have clear thoughts, perceptions, and memories during the experience.

Pure assumption.

You have made a good point that when you get right down to it, that it is anecdotal in nature. However when you have a lot of the same kinds of anecdotal experiences pointing in the same direction it is very suggestive.

Suggestive, yes. Mean anything, no.

As Evo pointed out, we have evidence that this woman's story has evolved over time. So she is not a valid source.

I'm not saying nobody has these and that they don't exist. We can't prove they don't, but we also can't prove they do. So until evidence (non anecdotal) comes to light, we have no reason to entertain them.

You don't accept "astrology, tara cards, crystals, and stuff like that" but you accept NDE's. Even thought they have exactly the same evidence going for them - none. They all only have anecdotes.

My best friend who is a retired anthropology professor used to be very skeptical of these types of things. After once working with Rhine at Duck University, and never seeing any hard evidence he came to the conclusion that there was no evidence for the paranormal.

Ok, based on the fact there is no evidence that's a logical conclusion.

However after looking at the current data even he has changed his mind.

So there is now valid evidence for the paranormal? This would be worth its weight in gold. Otherwise he has simply changed his mind based on the same evidence that made him deny it in the first place.

I only bring this up to show that there are more people in academics that feel this way than you might realize, but they are to afraid to say anything, for it could jeopardize their careers.

Only because there is zero evidence.

As result real studies are never done.

If there is no evidence presenting itself (or that we have no requirement for them to explain something), there is no reason to entertain the notion it exists and as such no reason to study it. Why don't people study the existence of unicorns?

The reason that Rhine never turned up any useful data was because these types of experiences (I mean all sorts esp abilities) are produced by strong emotion. His methods at the time did not take this into account.

So he does the experiments now with what he knows (strong emotion) and gains credible evidence. If he isn't, there's a reason - he obviously doesn't believe it will yield results despite what he 'knows'.