Is Parnia Backing down?

#2
I think it needs to be seen in context. The linked page is a proposal for the study. In order that a proposal is turned into an actual study, it needs to get past all sorts of obstacles, the last thing that is needed is to stir up any sort of controversy (even if justified) at this stage. Just keep things rolling along calmly and smoothly and progress will be made.
 
#3
I think it needs to be seen in context. The linked page is a proposal for the study. In order that a proposal is turned into an actual study, it needs to get past all sorts of obstacles, the last thing that is needed is to stir up any sort of controversy (even if justified) at this stage. Just keep things rolling along calmly and smoothly and progress will be made.
Indeed. Even Parnia will need money to do this study. And i imagine that hospitals and all those institutions are less reluctant to work with him and his team if hes less controversial right from the start.

And yet, its true that this seems a bit weird though. I thought Parnia would be strictly against that idea. Didnt he say stuff like that in his interviews of the last couple of months? Well okay, i dont know if hes believing that the brain is somehow involved - but its not the only thing at work there. Some sort of symbiosis or stuff like that. Or some sort of filter-model. Idk.
 
#4
I'm not sure I've seen any interviews with Sam Parnia for a while - has anyone got any links please? My impression (possibly mistaken) was that he was keeping a somewhat low profile in public, for various reasons that I can guess at but not know for sure.
 
#5
I note that link says the funding is coming from the Resuscitation Council UK and the Templeton Foundation and the sponsors Southampton University Hospitals Trust.

Only the Templeton Foundation could be said to be coming at it from maybe a 'spiritual' angle.
 
#6
Indeed there is the funding to consider. But there is also the ethical aspect. Anything which might be seen as interfering with the care of the patient without sound medical reason could be blocked.

In addition there is the practicality of maintaining goodwill and a spirit of cooperation among the many staff whose work may be impacted. Not all of those may see Parnia and his ideas in a positive light (though undoubtedly some may).
 
#7
"We think that these patients may have had better blood flow to the brain during cardiac arrest, leading to consciousness and activity of the mind"
What makes you think Parnia wrote that summary? And if you really want to know that or the answer to the question you pose, there's an email address given for the study's main contact person.
 
#8
Something interesting but only loosely related.

In 2001 Art Bell interviewed Pam Reynolds (Coast to coast). I've been trying to get hold of this interview for years and I finally came upon it unexpectedly on the net. The interview is excellent, in depth and full of interesting facts. It starts at 00.40 (forty minutes) and is extensive. Apologies to Psiclops for interjecting but people who are interested in this case will really want to hear this.

http://sitarchive.com/?p=2408
 
#9
In this summary of the AWARE study

http://public.ukcrn.org.uk/Search/StudyDetail.aspx?StudyID=17129

I noticed these words.....

"We think that these patients may have had better blood flow to the brain during cardiac arrest, leading to consciousness and activity of the mind"

Is this a nod towards the materialist argument or was it inserted to get hospital authority approval?

Or am I reading it wrongly?
I think it's a deliberate and probably necessary "nod" to the current mainstream so that he can carry on researching what is a very controversial subject, basically. If you just go to the Wiki Page on Parnia and enter the talk area, you can see how furious those Wiki activists are with him, determined to portray him as a "nut."
 
#11
Something interesting but only loosely related.

In 2001 Art Bell interviewed Pam Reynolds (Coast to coast). I've been trying to get hold of this interview for years and I finally came upon it unexpectedly on the net. The interview is excellent, in depth and full of interesting facts. It starts at 00.40 (forty minutes) and is extensive. Apologies to Psiclops for interjecting but people who are interested in this case will really want to hear this.

http://sitarchive.com/?p=2408
Thanks Tim. Regardless of one's views, I think this is a valuable archive recording which adds to the picture for those like myself who hadn't heard it before.
 
#12
Thanks Tim. Regardless of one's views, I think this is a valuable archive recording which adds to the picture for those like myself who hadn't heard it before.
Thank you, Typoz,

The detail is astounding. Pam " re-entered her body" on the >second< defibrillation ....she was "watching the train wreck" (with her uncle ) before the first defibrillation and did not "feel anything." She entered her body reluctantly and "felt" the second shock. The op-notes of course don't mention the OBE but at that point not only was she dead but her temperature was 27 degrees C (which is in the operation notes) ..a temperature at which you cannot be conscious.
 
Last edited:
#13
In this summary of the AWARE study

http://public.ukcrn.org.uk/Search/StudyDetail.aspx?StudyID=17129

I noticed these words.....

"We think that these patients may have had better blood flow to the brain during cardiac arrest, leading to consciousness and activity of the mind"

Is this a nod towards the materialist argument or was it inserted to get hospital authority approval?

Or am I reading it wrongly?
People recall near death experiences following cardiac arrest... to do so, they must have generally avoided major brain damage... That means that the patients brain cells must have generally had sufficient energy during the whole period of cardiac arrest to avoid cell death.

We're probably looking for Borgijins cellular energy 'sweet spot' of highly syncronised activity... Sufficiently low energy levels to cause the patients endogenous EM fields to generally collapse, but not low enough to cause major cell death.

At the higher end of this 'sweet spot' we probably get increased potential for an NDE OBE.
 
#14
IANDS has just published an analysis of the AWARE study, with some proposals for improvement of the methodology and scope of the study:

IANDS news: AWARE study initial results are published
Thanks for the link. Robert and Suzanne Mays have made some constructive comments, the criticisms regarding the sheer length of time (many decades) which the original AWARE protocol would require is something which myself and others have commented on previously. Their ideas of other ways forward are interesting.
 
#15
"We think that these patients may have had better blood flow to the brain during cardiac arrest, leading to consciousness and activity of the mind"
Who is "we"?

http://www.horizonresearch.org/Uploads/Journal_Resuscitation__2_.pdf

Resuscitation

journal homepage : www.elsevier.com/locate/resuscitation

Clinical PaperAWARE—AWAreness during REsuscitation—A prospective study

Sam Parniaa,∗, Ken Spearpointb, Gabriele de Vosc, Peter Fenwickd, Diana Goldberga,Jie Yanga, Jiawen Zhua, Katie Bakerd, Hayley Killingbacke, Paula McLeanf,Melanie Woodf, A. Maziar Zafarig, Neal Dickertg, Roland Beisteinerh, Fritz Sterzh,Michael Bergerh, Celia Warlowi, Siobhan Bullocki, Salli Lovettj,Russell Metcalfe Smith McParak, Sandra Marti-Navarettel, Pam Cushingm, Paul Willsn,Kayla Harrisd, Jenny Suttono, Anthony Walmsleyp, Charles D. Deakind, Paul Littled,Mark Farberq, Bruce Greysonr, Elinor R. Schoenfeld​
 
#16
In this summary of the AWARE study

http://public.ukcrn.org.uk/Search/StudyDetail.aspx?StudyID=17129

I noticed these words.....

"We think that these patients may have had better blood flow to the brain during cardiac arrest, leading to consciousness and activity of the mind"

Is this a nod towards the materialist argument or was it inserted to get hospital authority approval?

Or am I reading it wrongly?
It is a summary of a research proposal not a summary of results. It looks like it is a proposal for then next phase.

"AWARE II"
"Closure Date 5/31/2016"

"We propose a two year multicenter observational study of 900-1500 patients experiencing..."
 
#17
I reckon the survivalist mansion has begun to fall apart lately. As the studies go by (rats, brains, etc.) the faces of theose who would advocate surviving of the self to the bitter end get gloomier and gloomier by the day. Now that Parnia has made a statement which shows that he might be shifting towards materialism, peeps come up with the "he has to in order to get further funding" expedient.
Come on now... as bitter as the cake is, we have to bite it and flush it down with whatever we can: it's curtains for hope of an afterlife and we better pack our things and brace up for the void.
 
#18
I reckon the survivalist mansion has begun to fall apart lately. As the studies go by (rats, brains, etc.) the faces of theose who would advocate surviving of the self to the bitter end get gloomier and gloomier by the day.
Please don't be offended if I politely disagree, My face isn't gloomy, I'm smiling as I read the posts here. I think we need to separate the data points on the one hand with how we choose to interpret them on the other. The data is what it is, nothing more, nothing less. But there is scope, as you and I both illustrate, for a vast range of ways of looking at it.
 
#19
Please don't be offended if I politely disagree, My face isn't gloomy, I'm smiling as I read the posts here. I think we need to separate the data points on the one hand with how we choose to interpret them on the other. The data is what it is, nothing more, nothing less. But there is scope, as you and I both illustrate, for a vast range of ways of looking at it.
I'm not at all offended. Besides I like the way you responded and I kinda agree with you at some point.
 
#20
I reckon the survivalist mansion has begun to fall apart lately. As the studies go by (rats, brains, etc.) the faces of theose who would advocate surviving of the self to the bitter end get gloomier and gloomier by the day. Now that Parnia has made a statement which shows that he might be shifting towards materialism, peeps come up with the "he has to in order to get further funding" expedient.
Come on now... as bitter as the cake is, we have to bite it and flush it down with whatever we can: it's curtains for hope of an afterlife and we better pack our things and brace up for the void.
"Parnia has made a statement which shows that he might be shifting towards materialism,"

You mean Parnia was "a believer"... but on the evidence of the case of Mr A who heard the instructions of the automated defibrillator when he was dead ....he now believes there's a perfectly good scientific explanation for it ? And see's no reason to pursue the question any further ?

Gerry, is that you ?
 
Top