In spite of jerome welcoming me to this thread, I am NOT a "paranormalist", in the sense that I accept that some strange mental phenomena can occur when someone is close to death, but that does not mean there is not a natural explanation for them.

Rilx wrote:Where I was aiming at, is that no state of brains give us a measure for 'near death'. It is an explanation, impossible to experience literally.

Yes, the terminology is problematic. Potentially, 'nearly-at-the-point-just-before-death-might-have-occured-had-things-gone-really-badly-but-didn't experiences' is nearer the mark, but a bit of a mouthful

DavidMcC wrote:

Rilx wrote:

chairman bill wrote:We haven't been talking about brain damage based explanations, but rather differing brainchemistry ones. Those near-death experiences that don't result in loss of consciousness, but do give result in expectation of immenent death, are likely to be accompanied by other changes in brain chemistry, not least the massive flow of adrenaline that comes with such fear states. Been there, done that.

OK, chairman. Where I was aiming at, is that no state of brains give us a measure for 'near death'. It is an explanation, impossible to experience literally.

Are you suggesting that Dudely couldn't have come close to death?

No

DavidMcC wrote:In spite of jerome welcoming me to this thread, I am NOT a "paranormalist", in the sense that I accept that some strange mental phenomena can occur when someone is close to death, but that does not mean there is not a natural explanation for them.

I don't think anyone thinks you are David. Though the "paranormalist" camp believe that as well: otherwise parapsychology would be impossible. (We assume naturalistic explanations apply, andthat at worst the natural laws which govern said phenomena are outside of our current understanding. This differentiates paranormalism from supernaturalism, where anything goes, as the phenomena do not follow natural law - they are miracolous, magical - and hence completely outside of scientific scrutiny). Midl=y insulted you need to stress however you are not associated with me and my dodgy woo! Do people need a disclaimer before discussing NDE with me these days?!!

That aside, seriously if you want to be forced to keep astride of cutting edge science in a large number of disparate disciplines, learn critical thinking and meet a huge number of academics from varying backgrounds, psychical research and parapsychology conferences are great places to hang out, and the literature is demanding in a way I rarely find in my other fields, because i'm forced to constantly learn new things and scrutinise claims. We should teach more woo in schools!

j x

jerome wrote:Midl=y insulted you need to stress however you are not associated with me and my dodgy woo! Do people need a disclaimer before discussing NDE with me these days?!!

Sorry about that. No insult intended, but after my recent experience of posting in the Philosophy forum, I suspected that "anything I say may be taken down and used in evidence against me". No what I mean?

Absolutely! I don't go in there!

j x

DavidMcC wrote:

Rilx wrote:

chairman bill wrote:We haven't been talking about brain damage based explanations, but rather differing brainchemistry ones. Those near-death experiences that don't result in loss of consciousness, but do give result in expectation of immenent death, are likely to be accompanied by other changes in brain chemistry, not least the massive flow of adrenaline that comes with such fear states. Been there, done that.

OK, chairman. Where I was aiming at, is that no state of brains give us a measure for 'near death'. It is an explanation, impossible to experience literally.

Are you suggesting that Dudely couldn't have come close to death?

As I read his story, he didn't experience anything paranormal when he was close to death.

His story was very well written. I felt it very real too. Regarding all stress and drugs his experiences were well understandable.

Ouch. The more I read the more I can see why people who know about this stuff are attracted to afterlife explanations. I really want to read Spearthrower's cross-cultural examination and his roosters now, for some sanity. OK, I tried to find the DMT hypothesis, but as I covered it as well as I can for the moment in last post it seems. Now given the huge medical research efforts expended in thsi direction - I'm finding more and more papers, without trying very hard -- I though we might be closer to a neurological explanation, or at least knowing what is involved in terms of brain anatomy. What I'm finding is what I should have remembered - every popular "NDE explained away" article reflects a new and totally contradictory set of hypotheses involving different biochemistry and different areas of the brain. I need to start work but I might summarize it here in a minute - basically we still know nothing at all I'm afraid. That is my honest conclusion.

j x

chairman bill wrote:Jerome - brilliant stuff. Bedtime reading for me I think.

The point about distributed consciousness is interesting. Most mental processes are regarded as being to do with distributed systems in the brain. Key centres clearly exist, but the systems themselves are not all spatially located in specific regions. There have been accounts of heart transplant patients experiencing memories that are not their own, and developing food preferences that were those of the person whose heart they now have. Explanations have tended to centre around the idea that certain aspects of memory etc have been distributed throughout the nervous system, and the heart of course has a significant amount of 'brain' tissue associated with it. Further studies, relating to the ability of the body to acquire sensory input from other than the generally expected sense organs, suggest that some of the way in which we've traditionally compartmentalised neural processes might need a revision (excuse the pun).

The heart transplant information is interesting, but I'm not sure that we need propose such mechanisms to account for the veridical experiences. Can they not simply be explained by the possibility that, even as someone is lying there seemingly unconscious and unresponsive, their brain is till perceiving and creating memories of what is occuring around them?

BTW, great job reviewing and summarizing the literature, jerome. Much obliged. And thanks for the compelling firsthand account, Dudely. I've just skimmed the recent posts, but it looks like it bears more careful reading.

Rilx wrote:

DavidMcC wrote:

Rilx wrote:

chairman bill wrote:We haven't been talking about brain damage based explanations, but rather differing brainchemistry ones. Those near-death experiences that don't result in loss of consciousness, but do give result in expectation of immenent death, are likely to be accompanied by other changes in brain chemistry, not least the massive flow of adrenaline that comes with such fear states. Been there, done that.

OK, chairman. Where I was aiming at, is that no state of brains give us a measure for 'near death'. It is an explanation, impossible to experience literally.

Are you suggesting that Dudely couldn't have come close to death?

As I read his story, he didn't experience anything paranormal when he was close to death.

His story was very well written. I felt it very real too. Regarding all stress and drugs his experiences were well understandable.

Define "understandable". I am arguing that the NDE's that involve hallucinations about "out-of-body experiences", and seeing lights at the end of tunnels, etc, are "understandable", but do you?

OK, parts of the brain suggested to be involved in NDE's a brief chronological survey of a few papers cited in Cardena et al (2000) and what I have found to date

* Hippocampus (Gooch 1978)
* primarily hippocampus (Carr 1982)
* limbic lobe (Saavedra-quilar & Gomez-Jeria 1989)
* Sylvian fissure, right temporal lobe (Morse et al 1989)
* cochlea/temporal & limbic lobes/visual cortex (Blackmore 1993)
* biochemical interaction between muscarinic, NMDA, adrenocorticotropic hormone & enkaphalin systems (Persinger 1994)
* primarily hippocampus (Jourdan 1994)
* Reissner's fibre (Wile 1994)
* Frontal lobes -- at a molecular level the N-methyl-D-aspartate receptors. (Jansen 1997)

Do update as you find more.
j x

jerome wrote:OK, parts of the brain suggested to be involved in NDE's a brief chronological survey of a few papers cited in Cardena et al (2000) and what I have found to date

* Hippocampus (Gooch 1978)
* primarily hippocampus (Carr 1982)
* limbic lobe (Saavedra-quilar & Gomez-Jeria 1989)
* Sylvian fissure, right temporal lobe (Morse et al 1989)
* cochlea/temporal & limbic lobes/visual cortex (Blackmore 1993)
* biochemical interaction between muscarinic, NMDA, adrenocorticotropic hormone & enkaphalin systems (Persinger 1994)
* primarily hippocampus (Jourdan 1994)
* Reissner's fibre (Wile 1994)
* Frontal lobes -- at a molecular level the N-methyl-D-aspartate receptors. (Jansen 1997)

Do update as you find more.
j x

I'm not sure what parts of the brain are not covered by that list.

jerome wrote:

van Lommel P, van Wees R, Meyers V, Elfferich I. (2001) "Near-Death Experience in Survivors of Cardiac Arrest: A prospective Study in the Netherlands", The Lancet, 358(9298):2039–45,
http://pimvanlommel.nl/files/publicatie ... Lommel.pdf

Near-death experiences between science and prejudice in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 2012;6:209. Epub 2012 Jul 18 by Facco & Agrillo.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/article ... ool=pubmed


The effect of carbon dioxide on near-death experiences in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest survivors: a prospective observational study. Klemenc-Ketis Z, Kersnik J, Grmec S. in Crit Care. 2010;14(2):R56.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/article ... ool=pubmed

Hypercapnia and hypokalemia in near-death experiences. Greyson B. in Crit Care. 2010;14(3):420; author reply 420-1
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/article ... ool=pubmed
j x

Had a look at a few of these:

Previously (in other thread):

Near-death experience in survivors of cardiac arrest: A prospective study in the Netherlands
Pim van Lommel; Ruud van Wees; Meyers, Vincent; Elfferich, Ingrid. The Lancet358. 9298 (Dec 15, 2001): 2039-45.

"Methods In a prospective study, we included 344 consecutive cardiac patients who were successfully resuscitated after cardiac arrest in ten Dutch hospitals. We compared demographic, medical, pharmacological, and psychological data between patients who reported NDE and patients who did not (controls) after resuscitation. In a longitudinal study of life changes after NDE, we compared the groups 2 and 8 years later."

(some patients had more than one arrest) "Therefore, of 509 resuscitations, 12% resulted in NDE and 8% in core experiences."

"And yet, neurophysiological processes must play some part in NDE. Similar experiences can be induced through electrical stimulation of the temporal lobe (and hence of the hippocampus) during neurosurgery for epilepsy," with high carbon dioxide levels (hypercarbia),24 and in decreased cerebral perfusion resulting in local cerebral hypoxia as in rapid acceleration during training of fighter pilots,25 or as in hyperventilation followed by valsalva manoeuvre.4 Ketamine-induced experiences resulting from blockage of the NMDA receptor,26 and the role of endorphin, serotonin, and enkephalin have also been mentioned,27 as have near-death-like experiences after the use of LSD,28 psilocarpine, and mescaline.1 These induced experiences can consist of unconsciousness, out-of-body experiences, and perception of light or flashes of recollection from the past. These recollections, however, consist of fragmented and random memories unlike the panoramic life-review that can occur in NDE. Further, transformational processes with changing life-insight and disappearance of fear of death are rarely reported after induced experiences."

So although these authors suggest we should consider transendance in trying to understand the mechanism and lay particular emphasis on the fact that in this relatively small cohort (statistically speaking) associations with chosen medical factors were not found to conclude that hypoxia and other medical factors could not explain the occurrence of NDEs - this shows a lack of understanding of the nature of cause and effect. For example some autosomal dominant mutations result in disease in smaller fractions of carriers - thus known to be necessary, simply not sufficient.

The second paper is an opinion piece nothing more. Analysis of problems with some of current theories, but clearly from the view point of someone who thinks that hypotheses should be nailed down before considering them as valid alternatives to paranormal explanations. Trying to track down Transcult Pshyc 2008, 45(1) 121-133, since the authors here use it as evidence that the phenomena are similar across all cultures, where as the abstract suggests there are consistent differences between cultures, which might be excused as due to differences in language.

The third: Appears fairly well constructed - prospective, apparently with the objective of assessing role of hypercapnea, reasonable numbers. However far too many co-variates (10) for the numbers studied. So at best can be considered hypothesis generating.

4. Load of nonsense with Greyson trying to reinterpret the data of 3 to suit his beliefs.

chairman bill wrote:

DavidMcC wrote:

Rilx wrote:

chairman bill wrote:We haven't been talking about brain damage based explanations, but rather differing brainchemistry ones. Those near-death experiences that don't result in loss of consciousness, but do give result in expectation of immenent death, are likely to be accompanied by other changes in brain chemistry, not least the massive flow of adrenaline that comes with such fear states. Been there, done that.

OK, chairman. Where I was aiming at, is that no state of brains give us a measure for 'near death'. It is an explanation, impossible to experience literally.

Are you suggesting that Dudely couldn't have come close to death?

No

I would agree with the argument that my experience does not constitute my brain being close to ceasing its function. Of course, you could define "close" in a temporally close sense, but that doesn't tell you anything about what was actually going on at that time. What a possibly unrelated event was "close" to seems. . . apologetic. For example, I could easily argue that someone who went through an equally horrible experience and did not experience something strange is evidence in the other direction. Both of these arguments are critically flawed, obviously- the existence of NDEs by themselves is not evidence for anything other than sometimes brains do funny things, and the existence of people who do not have NDEs is evidence that sometimes brains don't do funny things. Anything else is an intellectual mirage.

If there are cultural references to NDEs, how much of what people experience are brought on by the fact the descriptions of NDEs are in pop media everywhere? What were NDEs like before the advent of the radio and television? Do we have that information from various parts of the world? I haven't read through all the reference material yet so if it's in there, forgive me because I haven't gotten to it.

jerome wrote:Auditory Hallucinations Following Near-Death Experiences Dr. Mitchell Liester. (Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 44:320-336, 2004).
http://www.medicine.virginia.edu/clinic ... es-JHP.pdf

j x

Greyson is the co-author.

Subjects selected from NDE selfhelp groups - so clearly a baised sample to start with. 43 groups contacted, 31 responded, questionnaire sent to somewhere around 500 subjects, 76 returned. So immediately we have many problems - self selected subgroup likley to feel they have something useful to contribute - not at all a representative population.
Of those answering the particular questions 40% had auditory hallucinations before the NDE, 80% after. Score on Greyson tool did not correlate with hallucinations (trend present, but given small numbers in study cannot exclude a positive association). Less educated heard more voices. After that there is a lot of guff about the nature of the voices (reassuring) as reported. Psychopathology is excluded only by self reporting.

Looking at this it suggests that schitzoaffective personality is common among NDE self help groups. That would explain the findings rather easily - but further studies would be necessary.

I was particularly struck by the scale used:

The scale includes questions about characteristic
NDE features in four categories: cognitive processes (e.g.,
“Did time seem to speed up or slow down?”), affective processes
(e.g., “Did you have a feeling of peace or pleasantness?”), purportedly
paranormal processes (e.g., “Did you feel separated from your
physical body?”), and experienced transcendence (e.g., “Did you
seem to enter some other unearthly world?”). Hearing a voice during
the NDE was one of the 16 items that contributed 0 to 2 points
on the scale.

These are pretty vague questions - one can clearly score more than 7 on the scale (required for diagnosis) with none of the florid experiences used to justify that this is a really intense event, unlikely to be explained by standard brain insults. In addition they are leading questions, used on a self reported questionaire.

Pebble wrote:

jerome wrote:Auditory Hallucinations Following Near-Death Experiences Dr. Mitchell Liester. (Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 44:320-336, 2004).
http://www.medicine.virginia.edu/clinic ... es-JHP.pdf

j x

Greyson is the co-author.

Subjects selected from NDE selfhelp groups - so clearly a baised sample to start with. 43 groups contacted, 31 responded, questionnaire sent to somewhere around 500 subjects, 76 returned. So immediately we have many problems - self selected subgroup likley to feel they have something useful to contribute - not at all a representative population.

I skipped this one after getting to the methodology. Now you can use data obtained like that - if you use one of the qualitative research methodologies, like discourse analysis, or grounded theory, or thematic analysis. I have a feeling Greyson didn't but I guess I'd best go read it. Cheers Pebble, glad you are working through them and commenting so clearly in your precis. Very very helpful.

Pebble wrote:
Of those answering the particular questions 40% had auditory hallucinations before the NDE, 80% after. Score on Greyson tool did not correlate with hallucinations (trend present, but given small numbers in study cannot exclude a positive association). Less educated heard more voices. After that there is a lot of guff about the nature of the voices (reassuring) as reported. Psychopathology is excluded only by self reporting.

Actually I'd be quite interested in the nature of the voices, as we have copious data on voices reported heard in the sane, with various forms of mental health issue, and in apparitonal experiences, and I'd be interested for which group they most resemble.

Pebble wrote:
Looking at this it suggests that schitzoaffective personality is common among NDE self help groups. That would explain the findings rather easily - but further studies would be necessary.

Hard to say. Schizotypy is a hot topic. Have you seen Goidron Claridge's stuff? That inspired a fairly hefty amount of research that I read through a couple of years back when I was considering a PhD in that are - my girlffrind's supervisor offered to supervise me, and he was supervised year before by Claridge in this area. (and yes of course he is a parapsychologist too - how else would I know him?) I guess i'd better take a long hard look at this, and ask a friend (Wendy C.) who certainly is up to date to do so - she is ace at this sort of thing as I recall (and a hard headed sceptic).

Pebble wrote:

I was particularly struck by the scale used:

The scale includes questions about characteristic
NDE features in four categories: cognitive processes (e.g.,
“Did time seem to speed up or slow down?”), affective processes
(e.g., “Did you have a feeling of peace or pleasantness?”), purportedly
paranormal processes (e.g., “Did you feel separated from your
physical body?”), and experienced transcendence (e.g., “Did you
seem to enter some other unearthly world?”). Hearing a voice during
the NDE was one of the 16 items that contributed 0 to 2 points
on the scale.

These are pretty vague questions - one can clearly score more than 7 on the scale (required for diagnosis) with none of the florid experiences used to justify that this is a really intense event, unlikely to be explained by standard brain insults. In addition they are leading questions, used on a self reported questionaire.

The last paper I listed has lots on said scale.

Keep it up Pebbles, and anyone else joining us?

j x

Managed to get hold of Belanti et al Transcult Psych 2008; 45(1)121. Not available for general release, so I shall summarise.

This is a literature review up to 2004 of 5 common databases looking for near death experiences, culture and NDE, and cross culture and NDE. 12 studies were found: Africa (morse & perry 1992) - 15 narrative case studies; China (Zhi-ying & Jian-xun 1992) 81 retrospective case series; Germany (Knoblauch & Schnettler 2001) 81 case narratives, Hawaii (Kelehear 2001) single case narrative; India Pasricha & Stevenson 1986) 16 prospective case studies, (Pasricha 1993) 13 prospective case series, (Pasricha 1995) 16 prospective case series, Israel (Abramovitch 1988) single case narrative; Mapuche (Gomez-Jeria 1993) single case narrative; Native American (Schorer 1985) 2 case narratives; Netherlands (Lome1 et al 2001) 62 propsective case series; Thailand (Murphy 2001) 10 retrospective case series.

The main findings are clearly limited by the small numbers, the different methodologies and lack of access to the original raw data.

Nevertheless some broad themes emerge - the western experience is christian, Thai is Buddist (fear of rebirth), indian is Hindu (spiritual beings, Karma and judgement), China (estrangement from body, religious figures, good and evil)and Hawaian (cultural - including volcanos and ancestors). The bright lights and tunnels of western ideology are less common, the sense of peace and love almost absent. NDEs in other cultures are in general more pragmatic - offerings of food, being sent back because of errors etc.
So the only shared features are a sense of altered consciousness and generalised visions.

Looking at the detail I think this was seriously misrepresented by Facco & Agrillo.

I saw this too.

A Hindu describes a Hindu god, an atheist doesn’t see a Hindu god or a Christian god, but some being.

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2013/ ... ter-death/

I didn't know atheists saw beings. Could it be a subconscious hold over from a religious point that never clears?

Sovereign wrote:I saw this too.

A Hindu describes a Hindu god, an atheist doesn’t see a Hindu god or a Christian god, but some being.

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2013/ ... ter-death/

I didn't know atheists saw beings. Could it be a subconscious hold over from a religious point that never clears?

I'm not sure what the difficulty is here. When you hallucinate, you see stuff. Some of that stuff could be called "beings."