Does consciousness survive death? A BBC investigation.

[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'.

 

[nismaratwork]

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.

I'm not saying ths to stop you, but I've tried to explain, as have JnJ, Evo, and others these same points. The people in this thread who believe, do so elsewhere in a similar fashion without an honest regard or capacity to change in the near-term.

So, it's good to see you stepping up, but I'm amazed that JnJ has stuck it out this long, I for one, give up.

@JarednJames: Forgive me, but there are only so many times I can repeat something verbatim, or see you and Evo and others do the same without either resorting to verbal assault, or walking away.

I'm walking away... sorry man.

Flex... if you're reading this... could use air support.

 

[JaredJames]

@JarednJames

I'm getting extremely bored of this "I want to learn" talk but then ignoring what's put out there.

Very close to just letting this one go. It's not productive in any way and I completely agree we're just repeating things over and over that no one is listening to.

 

[pftest]

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.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.

The papers speak for themselves, there is no need to rephrase them. The overall picture is that there are many indicications that, contrary to the popular assumption, awareness continues when brainfunction is severely impaired, or even in the case of clinical death. This is what needs further investigation. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it may very well be a duck. As far as i know, Parnia is currently researching this on a much greater scale. Specifically he is testing if during OBE's (occuring during cardiac arrest), people can see specific tags attached to emergency room ceilings, or if they can recall specific sounds that were played.

 

[nismaratwork]

The papers speak for themselves, there is no need to rephrase them. The overall picture is that there are many indicications that, contrary to the popular assumption, awareness continues when brainfunction is severely impaired, or even in the case of clinical death.

This is a statement of fact without sufficient basis under ANY reading of the guidelines here, or even reason. It's been explained to your more times than I care to consider just how useless a metric you're using, and a source that is proven unreliable. Beyond that, do you understand how GA works?... did you even READ Thorium's posts before you shared this... crud with us?

This is what needs further investigation. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it may very well be a duck.

Or it could be some jack with making a duck call with a dummy... more than a few ducks have fallen for that. You need something more than what you've offered, on orders of magnitude, because you're not questioning, not skeptical, you're (once again) simply propagandizing. If this is your pfTEST, consider it an abject failure.

As far as i know, Parnia is currently researching this on a much greater scale. Specifically he is testing if during OBE's (occuring during cardiac arrest), people can see specific tags attached to emergency room ceilings, or if they can recall specific sounds that were played.

READ, MORE. TALK, LESS. What part of cardiac arrest NOT being death do you fail to understand? Just what the hell do you do that this kind of blatant ignorance and willful misinformation doesn't get you fired, or beaten with reeds?

 

[pftest]

It is not at all unusual for anecdotal evidence to be used in neuroscience. After all, they are trying to understand the relationship between the brain (or regions of the brain) and perceptions. When a patient has an abnormality in the brain and also reports an abnormality in his perceptions, then this is very useful information for neuroscience. One example is a woman with epilepsy in switzerland who had part of her brain stimulated with electrodes and reported an out-of-body experience. Now of course one can disregard this as mere anecdotal evidence and ignore it, but why not investigate further? Perhaps that part of the brain actually does have something to do with OBEs.

Similarly, if people report perceptions around the time they are clinically dead, perhaps perceptions can occur during clinical death. This certainly is worth investigating and that is why scientists are doing exactly that.

To understand how anecdotes can be very useful to neuroscience, look at what Oliver Sacks has done.

 

[thorium1010]

Or it could be some jack with making a duck call with a dummy... more than a few ducks have fallen for that. You need something more than what you've offered, on orders of magnitude, because you're not questioning, not skeptical, you're (once again) simply propagandizing. If this is your pfTEST, consider it an abject failure.

I have to agree with you nismar, there is an abject failure to examine case situations. BY the way nice punchline:

@pftest have you read the paper in detail ? The one you posted was just a summary. what were the conclusions drawn?

 

[pftest]

This is a statement of fact without sufficient basis under ANY reading of the guidelines here, or even reason. <snip>

Please read the papers i linked to. Enough said.

 

[nismaratwork]

Please read the papers i linked to. Enough said.

Please try NOT to drag others such as Forestman with you.

You already have been the recipient of my favorite quote about propoganda... now let's add another:

"Certainty is being mistaken at the top of one's voice." (Ambrose Bierce)
and...
Fanaticism: "Redoubling your efforts when you have forgotten your aim." (George Santayana)

You do not use anecdotal evidence as EVIDENCE in neuroscience, you use them as anecdotes, and don't draw conclusions from them. Beyond that, Oliver Sacks is impressive, but he's criticized precisely because of his lack of detachment and reliance of anecdote. That said, where he uses anecdotes, often if not always there is established science he's exploring, not an absurd claim.

You're ignoring, not the content of these papers, but rather what they mean. You have your conclusion in mind, and are looking only for confirmation, rather than actually learning, being skeptical, or anything else. I'd say more, but frankly I'm close to verbally strangling you, and you're not worth it.

Here is some basic reading you NEED.. and I do mean need.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anesthesia
to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_anaesthesia
then
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theories_of_general_anaesthetic_action

Then prove you read it, or just go away before you're banned, or worse.

@Thorum1010: Thanks, you made a valiant effort too.

 

[pftest]

I have to agree with you nismar, there is an abject failure to examine case situations. BY the way nice punchline:

@pftest have you read the paper in detail ? The one you posted was just a summary. what were the conclusions drawn?

You too, please read the papers i linked to. Here is just a few quotes from them:

62 (18%) patients reported some recollection of the time of clinical death (table 1)

With lack of evidence for any other theories for NDE, the thus far assumed, but never proven, concept that consciousness and memories are localised in the brain should be discussed. How could a clear consciousness outside one's body be experienced at the moment that the brain no longer functions during a period of clinical death with flat EEG?22 Also, in cardiac arrest the EEG usually becomes flat in most cases within about 10 s from onset of syncope.29,30 Furthermore, blind people have described veridical perception during out-of-body experiences at the time of this experience.31 NDE pushes at the limits of medical ideas about the range of human consciousness and the mind-brain relation.

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

And:

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.
http://www.resuscitationjournal.com/article/S0300-9572(01)00469-5/abstract

Also, please not that i said "there are many indications that ... awareness continues when brainfunction is severely impaired, or even in the case of clinical death". I did not say there is proof. Similarly, when a woman has part of her brain stimulated and experiences an OBE, this is an indication that that part of the brain is involved in the OBE. When people report experiences during cessation of brainfunction (and this comes from published papers), then this is an indication that awareness continues during such an event. Simple.

I really don't like to repeat myself, but everything above can be found in my previous posts.

 

[thorium1010]

Also, please not that i said "there are many indications that ... awareness continues when brainfunction is severely impaired, or even in the case of clinical death". I did not say there is proof. Similarly, when a woman has part of her brain stimulated and experiences an OBE, this is an indication that that part of the brain is involved in the OBE. When people report experiences during cessation of brainfunction (and this comes from published papers), then this is an indication that awareness continues during such an event. Simple.

I really don't like to repeat myself, but everything above can be found in my previous posts.

You do understand when i say that brain death (or neuronal death ) is irreversible . Do you know what happens to stroke victims when they develop loss of of blood supply to one part of brain, they have a lot of problems.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stroke"

why is the situation mentioned (NDE) in the paper not similar to stroke victims who also have brain damage.

A flat EEG is not indicate of brain death always. How is it a patient who been declared clinically brain dead able to recover and regain consciousness.
they keep mentioning only cardiac arrest , flat EEG

With lack of evidence for any other theories for NDE, the thus far assumed, but never proven, concept that consciousness and memories are localised in the brain should be discussed. How could a clear consciousness outside one's body be experienced at the moment that the brain no longer functions during a period of clinical death with flat EEG?22 Also, in cardiac arrest the EEG usually becomes flat in most cases within about 10 s from onset of syncope.29,30 Furthermore, blind people have described veridical perception during out-of-body experiences at the time of this experience.31 NDE pushes at the limits of medical ideas about the range of human consciousness and the mind-brain relation.

The bolded part is just an assumption. not based on evidence . How is it that they can come to that conclusion ?

 

[pftest]

Yes if the definition of "braindead" includes "not coming back to talk about it", then yes, people who are braindead don't come back to talk about it. However i don't think this relevant here. The experiences are called near death experiences, so that issue has already been dealt with.

However, what would be relevant is papers that indicate that brainactivity which is undetectable by EEG or brainactivity which can occur during clinical death, can be responsible for the types of experiences that are reported.

 

[nismaratwork]

Yes if the definition of "braindead" includes "not coming back to talk about it", then yes, people who are braindead don't come back to talk about it. However i don't think this relevant here. The experiences are called near death experiences, so that issue has already been dealt with.

However, what would be relevant is papers that indicate that brainactivity which is undetectable by EEG or brainactivity which can occur during clinical death, can be responsible for the types of experiences that are reported.

OK.. brain dead, neural activity...


At least pretend that you knwo what you're talking about when preaching nonsense on a weak foundation. The points you've tried to make and support with these papers do not match the lack of rigor in your 'sources'.

Produce more, or cut the cr.. cr... crud.

 

[thorium1010]

Yes if the definition of "braindead" includes "not coming back to talk about it", then yes, people who are braindead don't come back to talk about it. However i don't think this relevant here. The experiences are called near death experiences, so that issue has already been dealt with.

However, what would be relevant is papers that indicate that brainactivity which is undetectable by EEG or brainactivity which can occur during clinical death, can be responsible for the types of experiences that are reported.

SO NDE's are cases where they are not brain dead or clinically dead just a transient period where brain activity is not detectable by EEG. so strictly speaking they cannot assert that in these situations brain avtivity is absent, only that it is not detectable by EEG machines.

So the real question should be does brain activity persist even when you have flat eeg ?

not assume that he is clinically or brain dead and seek alternative explanations .

 

[pftest]

SO NDE's are cases where they are not brain dead or clinically dead just a transient period where brain activity is not detectable by EEG.

I don't know where you conclude that from. I think if you rephrase this as "might", then i would agree with it: in NDE's there might be some kind of brainactivity undetected by EEG that results in such experiences.

A lot of different terms are being used now. I spoke about clinical death (because that's what the paper spoke of) while you spoke of brain death and neuronal death. Whatever we call it, the question is as you put it:

So the real question should be does brain activity persist even when you have flat eeg ?

And i would add this bit "and does that activity cause the reported experiences". The reported experiences here are very clear and structured, as Parnia mentions. Of course, there is also the possibility that the experiences happened before or after the minimum of brainactivity.

However, i do not share the conviction that because those things might be the case, we must conclude that they are the case. I would like to see published papers about these "mights".

 

[nismaratwork]

I don't know where you conclude that from. I think if you rephrase this as "might", then i would agree with it: in NDE's there might be some kind of brainactivity undetected by EEG that results in such experiences.

A lot of different terms are being used now. I spoke about clinical death (because that's what the paper spoke of) while you spoke of brain death and neuronal death. Whatever we call it, the question is as you put it:



And i would add this bit "and does that activity cause the reported experiences". The reported experiences here are very clear and structured, as Parnia mentions. Of course, there is also the possibility that the experiences happened before or after the minimum of brainactivity.

However, i do not share the conviction that because those things might be the case, we must conclude that they are the case. I would like to see published papers about these "mights".

Yeah, and I'd like to see you tried in the Hague for criminal ignorance and crimes against the scientific method.

You just have no regard for this forum beyond what you think it can do to forward your particular brand of metaphysical horse dung, eh?

You don't understand the difference between clinical death (brain death), cardiac arrest, or hypothermic processes... you are citing things and making assumptions based on pure ingorance, and you are amazingly resistant to new information. Why do you bother?... the only person buying what you're selling already drank the Kool-Aid.

The really annoying thing is that this COULD be an interesting discussion of neurology and the process of dying, but you're so damned intent on dragging it back to your particular view that it's immobile. Congratulations, I officially wish you ill tidings and bad luck.

 

[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?

Here is the full text:
http://folk.uio.no/benjamil/neardeath/neardeath3.pdf

 

[nismaratwork]

Here is the full text:
http://folk.uio.no/benjamil/neardeath/neardeath3.pdf

Did you read this? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theories_of_general_anaesthetic_action

Do you understand a damned thing about how these agents work, how the brain reacts to a lowered temperature, and how PAINFULLY useless the 'data' in your paper is?

It's not sceince, it's not even medicine... it's just people looking to confirm a preconception. You're really messing up here test.

 

[pftest]

Did you read this? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theories_of_general_anaesthetic_action

Do you understand a damned thing about how these agents work, how the brain reacts to a lowered temperature, and how PAINFULLY useless the 'data' in your paper is?

It's not sceince, it's not even medicine... it's just people looking to confirm a preconception. You're really messing up here test.

All the papers i linked to were published in journals that are in the physicsforums list of accepted journals. Enough said.

 

[pftest]

According to Parnia, brain function stops shortly after the heart stops. The point of the study was to focus on people who had been clinically dead - no brain function. The key to his most famous case is that memories of specific events allegedly formed while the patient was clinically dead - memories that could be checked for accuracy.

A flat EEG and cell death [brain death] are not the same thing.

This is one paper but only for a fee. There is another that was public... I'll try to find it later, but I don't know if that was published in a proper journal.
http://www.resuscitationjournal.com/article/S0300-9572(00)00328-2/abstract

Heres the full one for that one:
http://www.horizonresearch.org/ndearticle_1_.pdf

 

[nismaratwork]

All the papers i linked to were published in journals that are in the physicsforums list of accepted journals. Enough said.

No, not enough said... possibly the bare minimum, but not to justify your claims. You whine, and cite, then make a vague claim in the form of a question... rinse repeat.

:zzz: