View Full Version : Review: Erasing Death
Just finished the book Easing Death by Dr. Sam Parnia. I read his last book "What Happens When We Die"* and enjoyed it. This book goes into more depth on the latest in resuscitation science (as that's his medical specialty) and the fact people are resuscitated from clinical death far past what could be achieved even a short time ago. He then covers various aspects of the possibility of continued consciousness after death, and additional aspects of the near death experience, which he calls the "actual death experience" as the people are often clinically dead for an extended period of time. It's not a page turner and a tad dry in spots, but worth a read if interested in the topic minus any religious/spiritual leanings but a more science/med look at the topic.
http://www.amazon.com/Erasing-Death-Science-Rewriting-Boundaries/dp/006208061X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1426620307&sr=8-1&keywords=sam+parnia
* = Which I posted a review on M4C at the time
Interesting topic, but I think the experiences are just "whatever movie your brain plays for you" in order to protect you during death, a psychological equivalent of going into shock.
Basically your brain is like an oven. You cut off the electricity and it stops working but it may stay warm for some time, sometimes longer than you expect. The main difference is that it is unlikely that your brain will work again if you plug it back in a week later because of the damage done when it stops working.
I also don't think consciousness (aka heat) can exist after the brain (aka oven) has ceased function for extended periods. I wish I believed otherwise, it's kinda a downer.
Interesting topic, but I think the experiences are just "whatever movie your brain plays for you" in order to protect you during death, a psychological equivalent of going into shock.
Basically your brain is like an oven. You cut off the electricity and it stops working but it may stay warm for some time, sometimes longer than you expect. The main difference is that it is unlikely that your brain will work again if you plug it back in a week later because of the damage done when it stops working.
I also don't think consciousness (aka heat) can exist after the brain (aka oven) has ceased function for extended periods. I wish I believed otherwise, it's kinda a downer.
Dr. Parnia, who is very qualified to explore the matter, gives a number of reasons why that does not appear to add up. Obviously, some docs also agree with that assessment, but it's far from established and the evidence presented by Dr Parnia is compelling that's not the case. Or, not the case as current technology can test and some events too consistent and regular to simply dismiss as "tricks of the dying brain." If it's a topic of interest to you, I'd recommend giving it a read.
Dr. Parnia, who is very qualified to explore the matter, gives a number of reasons why that does not appear to add up. Obviously, some docs also agree with that assessment, but it's far from established and the evidence presented by Dr Parnia is compelling that's not the case. Or, not the case as current technology can test and some events too consistent and regular to simply dismiss as "tricks of the dying brain." If it's a topic of interest to you, I'd recommend giving it a read.
I don't think anyone has any real evidence either way. That is why I just offered my opinion and I suspect opinions tend to vary based upon personal beliefs. I'm glad they are doing work in this area, but it's a bit like studying the supermassive black hole at the center of our milky way galaxy. We know it is there...but that's about it. Nobody in the next 5 generations of humanity is likely to learn anything much more significant about it than what we know today. I suspect progress in this field of study will be about the same.
We would need a real breakthrough like thawing out a chryohead dude and having him explain what happened while he was offline.
I hope there's something afterwards; the thought of "nothingness" (although I guess you wouldn't know it) is depressing.
I'm not a religious person, and I suspect IF there is some existence after our bodies die it is something we cannot comprehend in our current dimensions of existence. i.e. it's nothing like the Bible/Torah/Koran/whatever tells us it is.
I don't think anyone has any real evidence either way. That is why I just offered my opinion and I suspect opinions tend to vary based upon personal beliefs. I'm glad they are doing work in this area, but it's a bit like studying the supermassive black hole at the center of our milky way galaxy. We know it is there...but that's about it. Nobody in the next 5 generations of humanity is likely to learn anything much more significant about it than what we know today. I suspect progress in this field of study will be about the same.
We would need a real breakthrough like thawing out a chryohead dude and having him explain what happened while he was offline.
And I'm trying to tell you there is, and the book is not just 200+ pages of hypothesis and rambling but the actual science as it exists, some of which is very compelling. Two, huge strides in neuro science is being made, and I'd expect some real "wow" moments to occur regarding the human brain, human consciousness, etc within our life time.
Lots of studies on both sides of that coin...Sam Parnia's stuff is not necessarily representative of the mainstream thinking on NDE, nor is it any more compelling than published data with hypotheses on the other side. Interesting stuff, but not quite mainstream science. Most neuroscience journals won't publish stuff on near-death-experience. By way of perspective...about 4-8% of the population reports an NDE when queried. In at least one study, about 5-6% of the population reports being abducted by aliens at least once.
Having said that, I don't dispute that there is physiology that supports the possibility that random neuronal discharges in portions of a hypoxic brain may create a variety of sensations from tunnel of light to a variety of other hallucinatory phenomena.
.
Lots of studies on both sides of that coin...Sam Parnia's stuff is not necessarily representative of the mainstream thinking on NDE, nor is it any more compelling than published data with hypotheses on the other side. Interesting stuff, but not quite mainstream science. Most neuroscience journals won't publish stuff on near-death-experience. By way of perspective...about 4-8% of the population reports an NDE when queried. In at least one study, about 5-6% of the population reports being abducted by aliens at least once.
Having said that, I don't dispute that there is physiology that supports the possibility that random neuronal discharges in portions of a hypoxic brain may create a variety of sensations from tunnel of light to a variety of other hallucinatory phenomena.
.
100% true. He's done more research into the topic of anyone I'm aware of by a long shot, but his position on it not representative of the mainstream thinking on NDE. However, due to his systematic approach to the topic, he's gaining acceptance in that he feels it's a topic that needs to be adequately investigated, regardless of the cause: simply the response to hypoxia or something "else." His discussion as to why he does not feel it's simply hallucinatory phenomena of a dying brain is however compelling but stops well short of any claims of proof per se, of causes one way or another.
There's a number of well respected people, with expertise to have an educated opinion on the topic - such as Stephan A. Mayer, M.D., professor of neurology and neurological surgery at Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons and others - who have stated they feel Parnia's work important of of value, regardless of the cause of NDE's which Parnia does not claim is caused by consciousness outside the human brain. He does how ever give the evidence to that possibility as well as others.
I'm going to read the book to see if it'll change my current thought about death.
That is: We essentially go back to where we came from i.e., nothingness.
I'm not at all religious (obviously) or think our being alive having any kind of meaning whatsoever, and I'm fine with that.
I'm glad I got to go on this ride, but when it's over, man, it's over...no great loss or tragedy.
Eventually, I'll simply become star dust which is what I was in the beginning.
I'm going to read the book to see if it'll change my current thought about death.
That is: We essentially go back to where we came from i.e., nothingness.
I'm not at all religious (obviously) or think our being alive having any kind of meaning whatsoever, and I'm fine with that.
I'm glad I got to go on this ride, but when it's over, man, it's over...no great loss or tragedy.
Eventually, I'll simply become star dust which is what I was in the beginning.
Excellent. I look forward to your review. I'm not sure if it's changed my view on death per se, but his prior book and this recent one, as well as hearing him interviewed on NPR, etc, has absolutely left me feeling current teck and knowledge not up to the task of explaining human consciousness, and how that relates to other issues. It's a topic covered many times over thousands of years, but usually in religious context, or philosophical context, or using pseudo science crystal wearing babble BS context, none of which really interests me being a science guy.... What he suggests is, there's likely going to be a new paradigm and even new science to actually answer the Q.
The part of the discussion in the book I found most interesting was the issue of whether human consciousness is simply a product of the brain itself or if the brain is simply the conduit or vessel for human consciousness. He presents some very interesting evidence for both and that Q/issue far from actually answered by science at this time.
And I'm trying to tell you there is, and the book is not just 200+ pages of hypothesis and rambling but the actual science as it exists, some of which is very compelling. Two, huge strides in neuro science is being made, and I'd expect some real "wow" moments to occur regarding the human brain, human consciousness, etc within our life time.
I'm sure there is a ton of data. But I'm probably talking more "big picture" than you are. I'm talking about what happens when the brain has been OFF for 24 hours or more, not when we've simply passed the "near death" and "actual clinical death" qualifiers which are measured in minutes. I hope I'm not coming off as too dismissive, I think I'm just looking for a "bigger question" answer and they are finding answers to "smaller questions."
I'm sure there is a ton of data. But I'm probably talking more "big picture" than you are. I'm talking about what happens when the brain has been OFF for 24 hours or more, not when we've simply passed the "near death" and "actual clinical death" qualifiers which are measured in minutes. I hope I'm not coming off as too dismissive, I think I'm just looking for a "bigger question" answer and they are finding answers to "smaller questions."
I can't think of too many Qs for human beings that are larger than the possibility consciousness after clinical death. I don't think you're grasping the size and scope here of the topics he's attempting to address. They don't get any larger, such as the very nature of consciousness, does it exist after death or is it simply illusions of dying brains, etc, etc. Two, his medical specialty is exactly that: bringing people back from actual death experiences (ADE's) where they have been dead for a prolonged time. The fact is, there's no longer a sharp demarcation between being dead and alive (a topic covered at length BTW), and he explores that reality also. Due to big advances in the science, people are dead, fully dead, as in zero brain activity, zero heart function, etc (which by all measures is dead*) for a longer and longer time (hours in some cases), and brought back. Depending on a few key things, 24 hours is not that far off I'd guess. Would 4, 6, or 12 suffice?
If there's a bigger picture issue than that, I'm not aware of it. Life after death, God(s) and life on other planets, are pretty much my top three :)
* = That's not "near death" that's dead. Hence why he's termed it ADE not NDE, which he thinks is now the appropriate term for it.
Fascinating. Here is an interview.
http://www.npr.org/2013/02/21/172495667/resuscitation-experiences-and-erasing-death
I can't think of too many Qs for human beings that are larger than the possibility consciousness after clinical death. I don't think you're grasping the size and scope here of the topics he's attempting to address. They don't get any larger, such as the very nature of consciousness, does it exist after death or is it simply illusions of dying brains, etc, etc. Two, his medical specialty is exactly that: bringing people back from actual death experiences (ADE's) where they have been dead for a prolonged time. The fact is, there's no longer a sharp demarcation between being dead and alive (a topic covered at length BTW), and he explores that reality also. Due to big advances in the science, people are dead, fully dead, as in zero brain activity, zero heart function, etc (which by all measures is dead*) for a longer and longer time (hours in some cases), and brought back. Depending on a few key things, 24 hours is not that far off I'd guess. Would 4, 6, or 12 suffice?
If there's a bigger picture issue than that, I'm not aware of it. Life after death, God(s) and life on other planets, are pretty much my top three :)
* = That's not "near death" that's dead. Hence why he's termed it ADE not NDE, which he thinks is now the appropriate term for it.
I tend to believe consciousness is a product of a self aware brain and as a result "to me" this is a question of how long the brain can retain information after ceasing to function. If I am right then there is a huge difference between 12 and 24 hours.
If however the brain is simply a conduit for consciousness as you believe, then we should be able to jump start things a week later and be fine. After all the brain is not producing consciousness so it only needs to function correctly to work as a conduit.
I tend to believe consciousness is a product of a self aware brain and as a result "to me" this is a question of how long the brain can retain information after ceasing to function. If I am right then there is a huge difference between 12 and 24 hours.
If the brain cells and other cells can be maintained, then there's no physiological reason there's going to be any difference between 12 or 24 hours. The brain is especially sensitive to low oxygen (hypoxia) and damage happens quickly. Modern tech (which many hospitals don't have BTW that Dr. Parnia goes into great detail over) allows for less damage done to the brain allows for extended times dead and resuscitation. It's not uncommon for the person to be brought back to life, but brain damage has occurred. The amount of brain damage will vary. But if the brain (especially) and other cells can be maintained (and that tech is improving by huge margins) then it's literally like re booting a computer. Read the book...
If however the brain is simply a conduit for consciousness as you believe, then we should be able to jump start things a week later and be fine. After all the brain is not producing consciousness so it only needs to function correctly to work as a conduit.
I did not state that's my belief. I was simply outlining the two major lines of thought on human consciousness which Parnia discusses at length. Which is correct, is the focus of future research the evidence for the possibility of the latter, a very interesting topic, at least in my view.
Fascinating. Here is an interview.
http://www.npr.org/2013/02/21/172495667/resuscitation-experiences-and-erasing-death
Yes, one of several interviews I have heard of his on NPR. I purchased his first book after hearing an interview on NPR.
And I'm trying to tell you there is, and the book is not just 200+ pages of hypothesis and rambling but the actual science as it exists, some of which is very compelling. Two, huge strides in neuro science is being made, and I'd expect some real "wow" moments to occur regarding the human brain, human consciousness, etc within our life time.
I was a person who only took the strict and rather ridged view of the mind/consciousness for most of my life preferring the comparatively simple and easy notion that there is nothing after the body dies. However, many things that have happened over my lifetime have persuaded me that there is LIKELY more to this question than "science" is able to understand. I always gravitated toward scientific thinking and pride myself of being brutally logical, but I'm also highly intuitive. To me the reluctance to consider the experiences of people, including people who have reported seeing the confirmed activities of others in other rooms while dead or near dead, is incomprehensible and driven by pure ego on the part of the "scientific" community.
I've not read the book you speak of, however I do know of Sam Parnia's work. Most scientists and doctors won't touch subjects like this because they are afraid. But other areas of science are pointing to possibilities that break conventional thinking.
There are many things that are not well understood in the world of Quantum Mechanics that point to a much richer and more complex Universe than we ever thought. Such anomalies as Spooky Coherence (http://www.academia.edu/6619328/Spooky_Phenomena_in_Two-Photon_Coherent_Atomic_Absorption) that will continue to lead to possibilities that we simply could not have imagined a few years ago.
There has been some speculation that all time and data exist in the universe at once and that the dimension we live in only allows us to see things in a linear fashion. If that is the case then almost anything is possible. The established science journals tend to be dry as compared to the theoretical brainstorming going on behind closed doors.
....If however the brain is simply a conduit for consciousness as you believe, then we should be able to jump start things a week later and be fine. After all the brain is not producing consciousness so it only needs to function correctly to work as a conduit.
You were doing fine until this statement which is illogical.
I did not state that's my belief. I was simply outlining the two major lines of thought on human consciousness which Parnia discusses at length. Which is correct, is the focus of future research the evidence for the possibility of the latter, a very interesting topic, at least in my view.
My apologies. I somehow got the impression that you subscribed to the later view. Perhaps because the book seems to champion that view I assumed you did as well.
You were doing fine until this statement which is illogical.
How so? Perhaps I poorly worded my ideas. What is specifically illogical about what I wrote?
My apologies. I somehow got the impression that you subscribed to the later view. Perhaps because the book seems to champion that view I assumed you did as well.
The book does not champion that idea. It does explore the idea in depth and presents the information that exists for both lines of thought. What's clear is, consciousness being simply the collection of cells working together is far from well established.
You were doing fine until this statement which is illogical.
It's not illogical and will actually happen in the near future. It's just like re booting a very complex computer. The major issue preventing it, is the rapid damage done to the brain, followed by other organs, within minutes for the brain (without intervention) and which can be extended farther and farther as the tech improves. By simply reducing the temp of the body you extend the time, hence why people who died in frozen rivers and such have been brought back after extended periods of time.
I'm going to check out this book, up until very recently I was very much convinced there was life after death. I have no idea what triggered the change, but I was very suddenly filled with doubt which led to some sleepless nights and a lot of Google time reading near - death experiences. I consider myself a devout Christian but I'm having a lot of trouble with the possibility of simply ceasing to exist.
I'm going to check out this book, up until very recently I was very much convinced there was life after death. I have no idea what triggered the change, but I was very suddenly filled with doubt which led to some sleepless nights and a lot of Google time reading near - death experiences. I consider myself a devout Christian but I'm having a lot of trouble with the possibility of simply ceasing to exist.
My advice is live your life as a Christian since it is what you are already doing.
If there is life after death, your religion "might" matter...it might be irrelevant. If there is not life after death, then all that matters is you lived a good life and were a good person.
I'm on the other end of the spectrum, I don't expect there is anything...so if there is an afterlife of any kind, I will be pleasantly surprised. If I don't qualify for some kind of afterlife VIP room, then I suppose at least I will be with most of my friends.
I would love for there to be something else, but I'm not about to spend this life trying to earn 72 virgins, break the cycle of reincarnation or anything else. I try my best to be a "good person" and that is really all anyone is going to get from me.
I'm going to check out this book, up until very recently I was very much convinced there was life after death. I have no idea what triggered the change, but I was very suddenly filled with doubt which led to some sleepless nights and a lot of Google time reading near - death experiences. I consider myself a devout Christian but I'm having a lot of trouble with the possibility of simply ceasing to exist.
Curiosity question: did you just hit your early 40's? Reason I ask is that is when I began to actually ponder this. My brother too. Maybe it's the realization at that age that you've basically lived half your life (?).
Curiosity question: did you just hit your early 40's? Reason I ask is that is when I began to actually ponder this. My brother too. Maybe it's the realization at that age that you've basically lived half your life (?).
Mid 30s, close enough I guess. I have a lot of regrets, wasted a lot of time when I was younger when I know I could've been more productive. I'm kinda lost at this point, seems like I'm racing to retirement when I should be enjoying life.
At age 10 I was diagnosed with viral encephalitis caused by measles. I had a severe convulsion and experienced paralysis, speech loss, and vision difficulties. A funeral home ambulance arrived to take me to a hospital. The embalmer told my mother that I was dead. I was floating above this activity and saw and heard every word uttered. A few days later I could repeat the various conversations and describe in detail what the two embalmers wore. Although I had not met them previously, I saw one of these guys 5 years later and introduced myself.
I'm waiting for the book to arrive.
Getting it used from Abebooks for $3.73 / no shipping charge.
One of the horrors (at least to me) is the idea of being buried in a box...especially if you retain any kind of consciousness.
When I croak, I'll be cremated.
No need to take up any real estate, pay for a headstone or any sort of service.
Let's face it, in very short span of time, say 10,000 years, (or far less...) the likelihood of being remembered is very very unlikely for a number of reasons. Even if you cured cancer and the heartbreak of psoriasis.
Plus, is being remembered very important anyway?
If, like me, you've lived most of your life, (yep, I'm a geezer) your friends and family won't be far behind you before they too head off for parts unknown...
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/toddler-survives-drowning-101-minutes-cpr-29759995
There are many medical reasons this happens. The hypothermia, the child's age, the lack of comorbidities, uninterrupted CPR, the list goes on. That said, there are many reasons this does not happen very often, and some of those gray areas have yet to be explained (well, adequately explained).
I find the who debate fascinating, and as a Christian I certainly have a biased view of what goes on, but having seen people die in various forms since 1990 I am always very thoughtful about death, resuscitation, and what happens to us.
One of the horrors (at least to me) is the idea of being buried in a box...especially if you retain any kind of consciousness.
When I croak, I'll be cremated.
Ummm, if we retain any kind of consciousness that is bound to the body and could be confined by a coffin, I don't imagine you will enjoy being cremated either.
I'm personally torn. On one hand I want a Viking / Roman funeral where I am set ablaze, and if I have a soul it escapes my body, and my mortal remains are returned to the cosmos. On the other hand I want a Pharoh's send off where everything is as perfectly preserved as possible and I'm set up in a massive tomb with all of my "stuff" and personal regalia for the next life.
But lacking funds I may have to be a bit more practical and simply choose my favorite sword to be at my side for eternity, perhaps a G3 as well with 10 mags. If nothing else it would be fun to confound future archeologists who may discover me.
SteyrAUG
"Ummm, if we retain any kind of consciousness that is bound to the body and could be confined by a coffin, I don't imagine you will enjoy being cremated either."
I've considered that, but think (maybe) the cremation/fire may extinguish what consciousness might possibly remain, thus releasing you from a kinda/sorta living hell in a non-functioning rotting body.
I'd rather simply not exist than to exist in hideous putrefaction...
But lacking funds I may have to be a bit more practical and simply choose my favorite sword to be at my side for eternity, perhaps a G3 as well with 10 mags. If nothing else it would be fun to confound future archeologists who may discover me.
How long will cosmoline preserve? Would be kinda cool to dig up some ancient with a perfectly preserved archaic rifle and useable ammunition around 3500 AD.
SteyrAUG
"Ummm, if we retain any kind of consciousness that is bound to the body and could be confined by a coffin, I don't imagine you will enjoy being cremated either."
I've considered that, but think (maybe) the cremation/fire may extinguish what consciousness might possibly remain, thus releasing you from a kinda/sorta living hell in a non-functioning rotting body.
I'd rather simply not exist than to exist in hideous putrefaction...
What if the Egyptians were correct and you need "remains" to exist in the afterlife?
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.