In Response to Penn and Teller On the Nature of NDEs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LAywxhVvLU4
this is a discussion of the science involved in NDEs
I have seen this short video about NDEs by penn and teller. And I have seen it used in several other threads on the dream views forums.. I really wanted to post a response to this video because I really disagree with it.
my first problem with it is its obvious bias. Its easy to tell seeing how they only asked scientific questions to the doctors who agree with penn and teller. They did have Dr. Moody on the video. But they let him talk for thirty seconds and then insulted him. Why did they make fun of him? Im guessing in order to discredit what someone is saying you first have to destroy their reputation.
My second problem is how they only presented half the story. They did present a plausible theory about the nature of NDEs (the dyeing brain theory) but they didn’t present any evidence to the contrary. It wasnt as if they said “we choose to belief this natural theory, even though there is evidence that suggests something different” They made it seem as if there is no evidence what so ever to strike questions at the dyeing brain theory.
There was a six year research project conducted by Pim Van Lommel and a number of other doctors and scientists. This was a landmark research project. Anyone who spends ten minutes searching google about NDEs will know about this study. But penn and teller make no mention to this study. I suppose because It doesn’t support the dyeing brain theory.
This is an excerpt from the research interview.
in the past some scientists have asserted that the NDE must be simply a hallucination brought on by the loss of oxygen to the brain [called "anoxia"] after the heart has stopped beating. This study casts doubt on that theory, in the words of its chief investigator, cardiologist Pim van Lommel, MD, "Our results show that medical factors cannot account for the occurrence of NDE. All patients had a cardiac arrest, and were clinically dead with unconsciousness resulting from insufficient blood supply to the brain. In those circumstances, the EEG (a measure of brain electrical activity) becomes flat, and if CPR is not started within 5-10 minutes, irreparable damage is done to the brain and the patient will die. According to the theory that NDE is caused by anoxia, all patients in our study should have had an NDE, but only 18% reported having an NDE... There is also a theory that NDE is caused psychologically, by the fear of death. But only a very small percentage of our patients said they had been afraid seconds before their cardiac arrest -- it happened too suddenly for them to realize what was occurring. More patients than the frightened ones reported NDEs." Finally, differences in drug treatments during resuscitation did not correlate with the likelihood of patients experiencing NDEs, nor with the depth of their NDEs
the video also forgot to even mention cases of people who had OBEs were they experienced real events in a period of brain death.
Here is a excerpt from Dr. Saboms study
includes a detailed medical and scientific analysis of a near-death experience of a woman named Pam Reynolds. She underwent a rare operation to remove a giant basilar artery aneurysm in her brain that threatened her life. The size and location of the aneurysm, however, precluded its safe removal using the standard neuro-surgical techniques. She was referred to a doctor who had pioneered a daring surgical procedure known as hypothermic cardiac arrest. It allowed Pam's aneurysm to be excised with a reasonable chance of success. This operation, nicknamed "standstill" by the doctors who perform it, required that Pam's body temperature be lowered to 60 degrees, her heartbeat and breathing stopped, her brain waves flattened, and the blood drained from her head. In everyday terms, she was put to death. After removing the aneurysm, she was restored to life. During the time that Pam was in standstill, she experienced a NDE. Her remarkably detailed veridical out-of-body observations during her surgery were later verified to be very accurate. This case is considered to be one of the strongest cases of veridical evidence in NDE research because of her ability to describe the unique surgical instruments and procedures used and her ability to describe in detail these events while she was clinically and brain dead.
And they forgot to mention the cases of people who were blind from birth, but could see during their NDE/OBE
here is a excerpt from Dr Kenneth Ring’s study
Vicki Umipeg, a forty-five year old blind woman, was just one of the more than thirty persons that 1. Dr. Ken Ring and Sharon Cooper interviewed at length during a two-year study just completed concerning near-death experiences of the blind. The results of their study appear in their newest book Mindsight. Vicki was born blind, her optic nerve having been completely destroyed at birth because of an excess of oxygen she received in the incubator. Yet, she appears to have been able to see during her NDE. Her story is a particularly clear instance of how NDEs of the congenitally blind can unfold in precisely the same way as do those of sighted persons. As you will see, apart from the fact that Vicki was not able to discern color during her experience, the account of her NDE is absolutely indistinguishable from those with intact visual systems. The following is an excerpt from Dr. Ring's latest book reprinted by permission.
Vicki told Dr. Ring she found herself floating above her body in the emergency room of a hospital following an automobile accident. She was aware of being up near the ceiling watching a male doctor and a female nurse working on her body, which she viewed from her elevated position. Vicki has a clear recollection of how she came to the realization that this was her own body below her.
I have to say that in the entire video I did not see a respectable skeptical point of view. I saw biased and obnoxious jerks who were looking for any explanation for the phenomena which suggests a different conclusion than their beliefs. I thought it was horrible how they showed no respect at all for the people they interviewed. Of course I didn’t really agree with the couple who thinks their old dog is reincarnated in their new dog..thats a little odd. But does it make them bad people like penn and teller make them out to be? I really think the only reason they even invited those people on the show was to try to humiliate the scientists who research the experiences and discredit the research that has been done. I think its wrong how they just rejected the evidence out of hand because it didn’t fall in line with their personal beliefs.
That is all I have to say, im wide open to discussion
