Scientists have finally proven what mystics, religions, and spiritual writings have said for years – that there is life after death after-all.
In the largest ever medical study conducted into near-death and out-of-body experiences, scientists have recorded that consciousness exists after the body completely shuts down, or dies.
BYPASS THE CENSORS
Sign up to get unfiltered news delivered straight to your inbox.
You can unsubscribe any time. By subscribing you agree to our Terms of Use
Telegraph.co.uk reports:
But scientists at the University of Southampton have spent four years examining more than 2,000 people who suffered cardiac arrests at 15 hospitals in the UK, US and Austria.
And they found that nearly 40 per cent of people who survived described some kind of ‘awareness’ during the time when they were clinically dead before their hearts were restarted.
One man even recalled leaving his body entirely and watching his resuscitation from the corner of the room.
Despite being unconscious and ‘dead’ for three minutes, the 57-year-old social worker from Southampton, recounted the actions of the nursing staff in detail and described the sound of the machines.
“We know the brain can’t function when the heart has stopped beating,” said Dr Sam Parnia, a former research fellow at Southampton University, now at the State University of New York, who led the study.
“But in this case, conscious awareness appears to have continued for up to three minutes into the period when the heart wasn’t beating, even though the brain typically shuts down within 20-30 seconds after the heart has stopped.
“The man described everything that had happened in the room, but importantly, he heard two bleeps from a machine that makes a noise at three minute intervals. So we could time how long the experienced lasted for.
“He seemed very credible and everything that he said had happened to him had actually happened.”
Of 2060 cardiac arrest patients studied, 330 survived and of 140 surveyed, 39 per cent said they had experienced some kind of awareness while being resuscitated.
Although many could not recall specific details, some themes emerged. One in five said they had felt an unusual sense of peacefulness while nearly one third said time had slowed down or speeded up.
Some recalled seeing a bright light; a golden flash or the Sun shining. Others recounted feelings of fear or drowning or being dragged through deep water. 13 per cent said they had felt separated from their bodies and the same number said their sensed had been heightened.
Dr Parnia believes many more people may have experiences when they are close to death but drugs or sedatives used in the process of rescuitation may stop them remembering.
“Estimates have suggested that millions of people have had vivid experiences in relation to death but the scientific evidence has been ambiguous at best.
“Many people have assumed that these were hallucinations or illusions but they do seem to corresponded to actual events.
“And a higher proportion of people may have vivid death experiences, but do not recall them due to the effects of brain injury or sedative drugs on memory circuits.
“These experiences warrant further investigation. “
Sean Adl-Tabatabai
Latest posts by Sean Adl-Tabatabai (see all)
- UK Gov’t Warns of Explosion in ‘Turbo Cancers’ Following Jab Rollout - December 2, 2023
- Children With Liberal Parents More Likely To Become Mentally Ill, Study Warns - December 2, 2023
- New Zealand Gov’t: ‘COVID Jabs Killed Over 20% of the Population’ - December 2, 2023
A friend of mine who is wheel chair bound had his back broken in a surfing accident. He drowned and was legally dead. He was pulled from the water and resuscitated after at least 5 minutes of floating face down in the water. He never lost consciousness. He remembers floating face down. He remembers looking at the sand below him as he floated helplessly unable to move. He had already “drowned” in the medical sense, his lungs were full of water and he was not breathing. He remembers finally being drug to shore by another surfer. He remembers be laid out on the sand and he remembers them performing CPR on him to revive him. However I don’t think there is anything supernatural about it. I think the brain is active longer than current medical science realizes after the heart stops and the person stops breathing. In my freind’s case that was definitely so.
A friend of mine who is wheel chair bound had his back broken in a surfing accident. He drowned and was legally dead. He was pulled from the water and resuscitated after at least 5 minutes of floating face down in the water. He never lost consciousness. He remembers floating face down. He remembers looking at the sand below him as he floated helplessly unable to move. He had already “drowned” in the medical sense, his lungs were full of water and he was not breathing. He remembers finally being drug to shore by another surfer. He remembers be laid out on the sand and he remembers them performing CPR on him to revive him. However I don’t think there is anything supernatural about it. I think the brain is active longer than current medical science realizes after the heart stops and the person stops breathing. In my freind’s case that was definitely so.
the above research is stupid!!!!
seriously!
it takes at least 4 or 5 minutes before the brain is technically dead.. (not 20 to 30 seconds!!!)
the fact that they heard these “BEEPS” in the room, only shows that they were not yet dead!!!
it proves NOTHING that they were ‘in spirit’ and dead and heard these sounds ‘from beyond’.
I am NOT disagreeing about there being an afterlife. But i am disagreeing with the stupid interpretation of this research.
basically: to hear a BEEP after a miinute or two, does NOT indicate that the person was even fully dead!!
Death is a whole process… its not just ALIVE and DEAD.
there is a Whole long transition period.
this study just caught people during the transition period when they were not actually completely dead.
The authors of the study used that single case as an illustrative example of what happens after death, and to show that although the man was clinically — by all measurements — dead, he was able to see exactly what was going on in the room. The study was obviously based on many more accounts like this one. The literature of near death contains hundreds and hundreds of similar examples.
In my home town, a famous example was a man who died at a hospital here, and floated upward through the ceiling and into the air above the hospital. He was floating above the roof of the hospital, and noticed a red tennis shoe wedged next to an outlet stack on the roof. After he was resuscitated, he recounted seeing the shoe and described exactly where it was. Technicians got up on the roof and sure enough, they found the red shoe exactly where the man had described it being. Other “dead” persons have described family conversations in hospital hallways, what is happening to a family member far away simultaneously, etc. etc.
I believe that this research is not flawed merely because this journalist used one case example to describe a typical experience of those who are clinically “dead.”
Since we do not die, and since all of our actions have moral repercussions that are felt after death, it is wise to live life knowing that one will be held accountable for one’s life — specifically, how one treats other living beings — here on earth.
I had this experience as a two-year-old child. I watched my surgery from the ceiling and was able to describe it to my mother when I was three and had the language skills to express it. I still remember it very clearly, decades later. I had another near death experience as a child when I almost drowned. I have never doubted since early childhood that we are souls in bodies – souls that continue to live outside of our bodies. (Sorry, not stalking you. I was reviewing your posts to the other thread and your post here interested me. ;0) )
i sure want to believe you, friend. I so desperately want to. That there is more than brain and there is an electromagnetic counterpart called soul.
the story of the TENNIS SHOE is unreliable, because there are so many holes…
if you read the FULL REPORT, you slowly realize that its most likely not true.
hence it being an urban legend and unreliable evidence.
(also, its pretty suspect that only the persons FIRST NAME is known!! which is usually the ‘hallmark’ of an untrue story, as it is impossible to verify. (as you know, hospitals would have full names of patients!! so the story is already a bit dodgy to start with.
and here is the FULL REPORT if you care to read it:
“Maria’s Shoe”
In 1984 Kimberly Clark (now Kimberly Clark Sharp) reported a sensational case of apparent veridical paranormal perception during an NDE. Seven years earlier, in April 1977, an out-of-town migrant worker known only as “Maria” was admitted to the coronary care unit of Seattle’s Harborview Medical Center after a heart attack. Three days later, Maria had a second heart attack while still hospitalized and was quickly resuscitated. When Clark came to check on Maria’s condition later that day, Maria reported an OBE where she witnessed her resuscitation from above, noting printouts flowing from the machines monitoring her vital signs. Next she reported becoming distracted by something over the area surrounding the emergency room entrance and ‘willing herself’ outside of the hospital. She accurately described the area surrounding the emergency room entrance, which Clark found curious since a canopy over the entrance would have obstructed Maria’s view if she had simply looked out of her hospital room window. Maria then became distracted by something on a third-floor window ledge on the far side of the hospital, ‘willing herself’ to this location as well. From this apparent vantage point, she noted a left-foot man’s tennis shoe on a third-floor window ledge. She described the shoe as dark blue with a worn-out patch over the little toe and a single shoelace tucked under its heel. To corroborate her story, Maria asked Clark to go look for the shoe (Clark 242-243).
Unable to see anything from outside the hospital at ground level, Clark reports, she proceeded to search room-to-room on the floor above Maria’s room, pressing her face hard against the windows to see their ledges. Eventually she came across the reported shoe in one of the rooms, but insisted that she could not see the worn-out toe facing outward or the tucked-in shoelace from inside the room. Clark then removed the shoe from the ledge (243). Kenneth Ring and Madelaine Lawrence hail the report as one of most convincing cases of veridical paranormal perception during NDEs on record:
[T]he facts of the case seem incontestable. Maria’s inexplicable detection of that inexplicable shoe is a strange and strangely beguiling sighting of the sort that has the power to arrest the skeptic’s argument in mid-sentence, if only by virtue of its indisputable improbability (Ring and Lawrence 223).
This case has taken on the status of something of an urban legend, allegedly demonstrating that Maria learned things during her OBE that she could not have possibly known about other than by actually leaving her body. But as Hayden Ebbern, Sean Mulligan, and Barry Beyerstein make clear, the details Maria reported were in fact quite accessible to her through ordinary sense perception and inference.
In 1994 Ebbern and Mulligan visited Harborview to survey the sites where the NDE took place and to interview Clark. They were unable to locate “Maria” or anyone who knew her personally and suspect that she is now deceased (Ebbern, Mulligan, and Beyerstein 30). They examined each of the details of Clark’s report and found the case much less impressive than it has been made out to be. First, after being hospitalized for three days, Maria would have been quite familiar with the equipment monitoring her; so her perception of the printouts during her OBE may be nothing more than “a visual memory incorporated into the hallucinatory world that is often formed by a sensory-deprived and oxygen-starved brain” (31). Second, her perception of details concerning the area surrounding the emergency room entrance were of details that “common sense would dictate”—such as the fact that the doors opened inward, accommodating paramedics rushing in patients who need immediate attention (31). Moreover, she was brought into the hospital through this very entrance—albeit at night, but the area was well-lit—and could’ve picked up details about it from normal sensory channels then (31-32). The fact that rushing ambulances would traverse a one-way driveway, too, is something anyone could infer from common sense. Finally, Maria’s hospital room was just above the emergency room entrance for a full three days before she had her OBE, and “she could have [easily] gained some sense of the traffic flow from the sounds of the ambulances coming and going” and from nighttime “reflections of vehicle lights” even if she never left her bed (32).
But what of the most persuasive aspect of her report—her description of the celebrated shoe? How difficult would it have been for her to learn these details without having left her body? Ebbern and Mulligan set out to determine exactly that:
As part of our investigation, Ebbern and Mulligan visited Harborview Medical Center to determine for themselves just how difficult it would be to see, from outside the hospital, a shoe on one of its third-floor window ledges. They placed a running shoe of their own at the place Clark described and then went outside to observe what was visible from ground level. They were astonished at the ease with which they could see and identify the shoe.
Clark’s claim that the shoe would have been invisible from ground level outside the hospital is all the more incredible because the investigators’ viewpoint was considerably inferior to what Clark’s would have been seventeen years earlier. That is because, in 1994, there was new construction under way beneath the window in question and this forced Ebbern and Mulligan to view the shoe from a much greater distance than would have been necessary for Clark (32).
As the authors note, what was a construction area for them in 1994 was a high-traffic parking lot and recreation area back in 1977, providing an even better view of Maria’s shoe than the one they saw so easily. Their 1994 ‘test shoe’ was so conspicuous, in fact, that by the time they returned to the hospital one week later, “someone not specifically looking for it” had noticed it and removed it (32). It is quite likely, then, “that anyone who might have noticed the shoe back in 1977 would have commented on it because of the novelty of its location” and Maria could have heard such a conversation and consciously forgotten about it, incorporating it into her out-of-body imagery (32). Moreover, even if no one had seen it from the ground level, Ebbern and Mulligan tested Clark’s claim that Maria’s shoe was impossible to see from inside the room unless she pressed her face hard against the glass looking for it. This claim was found to be wanting:
They easily placed their running shoe on the ledge from inside one of the rooms and it was clearly visible from various points within the room. There was no need whatsoever for anyone to press his or her face against the glass to see the shoe. In fact, one needed only to take a few steps into the room to be able to see it clearly. To make matters worse for Clark’s account, a patient would not even need to strain to see it from his or her bed in the room. So it is apparent that many people inside as well as outside the hospital would have had the opportunity to notice the now-famous shoe, making it even more likely that Maria could have overheard some mention of it (32).
The authors add that anyone who did press his or her face against the glass to get a closer look at the conspicuous shoe from inside the room could easily see the worn-out little toe and tucked shoelace: “we had no difficulty seeing the shoe’s allegedly hidden outer side” (32). They conclude:
[Maria’s shoe] would have been visible, both inside and outside the hospital, to numerous people who could have come into contact with her. It also seems likely that some of them might have mentioned it within earshot….
[And Clark] did not publicly report the details of Maria’s NDE until seven years after it occurred. It is quite possible that during this interval some parts of the story were forgotten and some details may have been interpolated…. [Moreover], we have no way of knowing what leading questions Maria may have been asked, or what Maria might have “recalled” that did not fit and was dropped from the record.
Furthermore, Clark’s inaccurate account of how difficult the shoe was to see from both inside and out provides evidence that she subconsciously embellished significant details to bolster the apparently veridical nature of the case.
Love sceptics why do you so desperately want to disprove an afterlife, what can you possibly gain, you are actually better believeng than not believing, as nothing is to be gainedby not believing but some kind of assurance is to be gained by believing , what does it matter.
I am not a skeptic. (i 90% believe in an afterlife).
but I wont just accept poorly performed studies as something to rely on.
i have no idea about your goals and methods in life. but it seems you just about accept anything without analysing it.
so I can tell you that i saw a grid in the sky which pulled me upwards when I was sick once.
and I am sure you will believe me on blind and un-annalytical faith.
really, the ‘study’ on this article was seriously flawed. and its incredible that not many people see the obvious error.
if you re-read my above response, you will see that I am ‘downing’ the article. (not the afterlife).
i dont do the ‘blind faith’ thing.
its like believing jesus was white and that god will only allow people into heaven who follow jesus.
so, anyone born in a part of the world where there is no books, will never get a chance to enter heaven!!
honestly! … the gulliblity of people is amazing!
hence, people should use their brains MORE and not let themselves be led astray by people in control, or by flakey, weak evidence.
THANK YOU.
For actual science click here http://www.apevidence.wordpress.com/experiments
the above research is stupid!!!!
seriously!
it takes at least 4 or 5 minutes before the brain is technically dead.. (not 20 to 30 seconds!!!)
the fact that they heard these “BEEPS” in the room, only shows that they were not yet dead!!!
it proves NOTHING that they were ‘in spirit’ and dead and heard these sounds ‘from beyond’.
I am NOT disagreeing about there being an afterlife. But i am disagreeing with the stupid interpretation of this research.
basically: to hear a BEEP after a miinute or two, does NOT indicate that the person was even fully dead!!
Death is a whole process… its not just ALIVE and DEAD.
there is a Whole long transition period.
this study just caught people during the transition period when they were not actually completely dead.
I had this experience as a two-year-old child. I watched my surgery from the ceiling and was able to describe it to my mother when I was three and had the language skills to express it. I still remember it very clearly, decades later. I had another near death experience as a child when I almost drowned. I have never doubted since early childhood that we are souls in bodies – souls that continue to live outside of our bodies. (Sorry, not stalking you. I was reviewing your posts to the other thread and your post here interested me. ;0) )
i sure want to believe you, friend. I so desperately want to. That there is more than brain and there is an electromagnetic counterpart called soul.
Love sceptics why do you so desperately want to disprove an afterlife, what can you possibly gain, you are actually better believeng than not believing, as nothing is to be gainedby not believing but some kind of assurance is to be gained by believing , what does it matter.
I am not a skeptic. (i 90% believe in an afterlife).
but I wont just accept poorly performed studies as something to rely on.
i have no idea about your goals and methods in life. but it seems you just about accept anything without analysing it.
so I can tell you that i saw a grid in the sky which pulled me upwards when I was sick once.
and I am sure you will believe me on blind and un-annalytical faith.
really, the ‘study’ on this article was seriously flawed. and its incredible that not many people see the obvious error.
if you re-read my above response, you will see that I am ‘downing’ the article. (not the afterlife).
i dont do the ‘blind faith’ thing.
its like believing jesus was white and that god will only allow people into heaven who follow jesus.
so, anyone born in a part of the world where there is no books, will never get a chance to enter heaven!!
honestly! … the gulliblity of people is amazing!
hence, people should use their brains MORE and not let themselves be led astray by people in control, or by flakey, weak evidence.
the story of the TENNIS SHOE is unreliable, because there are so many holes…
if you read the FULL REPORT, you slowly realize that its most likely not true.
hence it being an urban legend and unreliable evidence.
(also, its pretty suspect that only the persons FIRST NAME is known!! which is usually the ‘hallmark’ of an untrue story, as it is impossible to verify. (as you know, hospitals would have full names of patients!! so the story is already a bit dodgy to start with.
and here is the FULL REPORT if you care to read it:
“Maria’s Shoe”
In 1984 Kimberly Clark (now Kimberly Clark Sharp) reported a sensational case of apparent veridical paranormal perception during an NDE. Seven years earlier, in April 1977, an out-of-town migrant worker known only as “Maria” was admitted to the coronary care unit of Seattle’s Harborview Medical Center after a heart attack. Three days later, Maria had a second heart attack while still hospitalized and was quickly resuscitated. When Clark came to check on Maria’s condition later that day, Maria reported an OBE where she witnessed her resuscitation from above, noting printouts flowing from the machines monitoring her vital signs. Next she reported becoming distracted by something over the area surrounding the emergency room entrance and ‘willing herself’ outside of the hospital. She accurately described the area surrounding the emergency room entrance, which Clark found curious since a canopy over the entrance would have obstructed Maria’s view if she had simply looked out of her hospital room window. Maria then became distracted by something on a third-floor window ledge on the far side of the hospital, ‘willing herself’ to this location as well. From this apparent vantage point, she noted a left-foot man’s tennis shoe on a third-floor window ledge. She described the shoe as dark blue with a worn-out patch over the little toe and a single shoelace tucked under its heel. To corroborate her story, Maria asked Clark to go look for the shoe (Clark 242-243).
Unable to see anything from outside the hospital at ground level, Clark reports, she proceeded to search room-to-room on the floor above Maria’s room, pressing her face hard against the windows to see their ledges. Eventually she came across the reported shoe in one of the rooms, but insisted that she could not see the worn-out toe facing outward or the tucked-in shoelace from inside the room. Clark then removed the shoe from the ledge (243). Kenneth Ring and Madelaine Lawrence hail the report as one of most convincing cases of veridical paranormal perception during NDEs on record:
[T]he facts of the case seem incontestable. Maria’s inexplicable detection of that inexplicable shoe is a strange and strangely beguiling sighting of the sort that has the power to arrest the skeptic’s argument in mid-sentence, if only by virtue of its indisputable improbability (Ring and Lawrence 223).
This case has taken on the status of something of an urban legend, allegedly demonstrating that Maria learned things during her OBE that she could not have possibly known about other than by actually leaving her body. But as Hayden Ebbern, Sean Mulligan, and Barry Beyerstein make clear, the details Maria reported were in fact quite accessible to her through ordinary sense perception and inference.
In 1994 Ebbern and Mulligan visited Harborview to survey the sites where the NDE took place and to interview Clark. They were unable to locate “Maria” or anyone who knew her personally and suspect that she is now deceased (Ebbern, Mulligan, and Beyerstein 30). They examined each of the details of Clark’s report and found the case much less impressive than it has been made out to be. First, after being hospitalized for three days, Maria would have been quite familiar with the equipment monitoring her; so her perception of the printouts during her OBE may be nothing more than “a visual memory incorporated into the hallucinatory world that is often formed by a sensory-deprived and oxygen-starved brain” (31). Second, her perception of details concerning the area surrounding the emergency room entrance were of details that “common sense would dictate”—such as the fact that the doors opened inward, accommodating paramedics rushing in patients who need immediate attention (31). Moreover, she was brought into the hospital through this very entrance—albeit at night, but the area was well-lit—and could’ve picked up details about it from normal sensory channels then (31-32). The fact that rushing ambulances would traverse a one-way driveway, too, is something anyone could infer from common sense. Finally, Maria’s hospital room was just above the emergency room entrance for a full three days before she had her OBE, and “she could have [easily] gained some sense of the traffic flow from the sounds of the ambulances coming and going” and from nighttime “reflections of vehicle lights” even if she never left her bed (32).
But what of the most persuasive aspect of her report—her description of the celebrated shoe? How difficult would it have been for her to learn these details without having left her body? Ebbern and Mulligan set out to determine exactly that:
As part of our investigation, Ebbern and Mulligan visited Harborview Medical Center to determine for themselves just how difficult it would be to see, from outside the hospital, a shoe on one of its third-floor window ledges. They placed a running shoe of their own at the place Clark described and then went outside to observe what was visible from ground level. They were astonished at the ease with which they could see and identify the shoe.
Clark’s claim that the shoe would have been invisible from ground level outside the hospital is all the more incredible because the investigators’ viewpoint was considerably inferior to what Clark’s would have been seventeen years earlier. That is because, in 1994, there was new construction under way beneath the window in question and this forced Ebbern and Mulligan to view the shoe from a much greater distance than would have been necessary for Clark (32).
As the authors note, what was a construction area for them in 1994 was a high-traffic parking lot and recreation area back in 1977, providing an even better view of Maria’s shoe than the one they saw so easily. Their 1994 ‘test shoe’ was so conspicuous, in fact, that by the time they returned to the hospital one week later, “someone not specifically looking for it” had noticed it and removed it (32). It is quite likely, then, “that anyone who might have noticed the shoe back in 1977 would have commented on it because of the novelty of its location” and Maria could have heard such a conversation and consciously forgotten about it, incorporating it into her out-of-body imagery (32). Moreover, even if no one had seen it from the ground level, Ebbern and Mulligan tested Clark’s claim that Maria’s shoe was impossible to see from inside the room unless she pressed her face hard against the glass looking for it. This claim was found to be wanting:
They easily placed their running shoe on the ledge from inside one of the rooms and it was clearly visible from various points within the room. There was no need whatsoever for anyone to press his or her face against the glass to see the shoe. In fact, one needed only to take a few steps into the room to be able to see it clearly. To make matters worse for Clark’s account, a patient would not even need to strain to see it from his or her bed in the room. So it is apparent that many people inside as well as outside the hospital would have had the opportunity to notice the now-famous shoe, making it even more likely that Maria could have overheard some mention of it (32).
The authors add that anyone who did press his or her face against the glass to get a closer look at the conspicuous shoe from inside the room could easily see the worn-out little toe and tucked shoelace: “we had no difficulty seeing the shoe’s allegedly hidden outer side” (32). They conclude:
[Maria’s shoe] would have been visible, both inside and outside the hospital, to numerous people who could have come into contact with her. It also seems likely that some of them might have mentioned it within earshot….
[And Clark] did not publicly report the details of Maria’s NDE until seven years after it occurred. It is quite possible that during this interval some parts of the story were forgotten and some details may have been interpolated…. [Moreover], we have no way of knowing what leading questions Maria may have been asked, or what Maria might have “recalled” that did not fit and was dropped from the record.
Furthermore, Clark’s inaccurate account of how difficult the shoe was to see from both inside and out provides evidence that she subconsciously embellished significant details to bolster the apparently veridical nature of the case.
I was clinically dead for 10 minutes and on full life support and in coma for 2 months. I was not in my body during those times. I went through the light into a much much greater place. We have a choice dependant on what we choose to believe and who we choose to surrender to ….
Death is the proof that nothing “divine” or “magical” exists in this world. Human ego just can’t accept the non existence because if it did then there would be no need to struggle to exist. ‘the purpose of conscious mind is to keep living that’s why we make ancestors. Someday maybe science finds out a way for all of us to keep going forever (maybe through an AI machinery or something) but until then…live your life folks, there is nothing else out there or beyond…its only this and now! We waste our precious time in nonsense and stupid things trying to survive and we forget that….its only one life…
Death is the proof that nothing “divine” or “magical” exists in this world. Human ego just can’t accept the non existence because if it did then there would be no need to struggle to exist. ‘the purpose of conscious mind is to keep living that’s why we make ancestors. Someday maybe science finds out a way for all of us to keep going forever (maybe through an AI machinery or something) but until then…live your life folks, there is nothing else out there or beyond…its only this and now! We waste our precious time in nonsense and stupid things trying to survive and we forget that….its only one life…
It is only one life. I do agree with that. I was dead for 10 minutes and in a coma for two months. During that time, i was not just floating in earthly realm. I went through the light into a much greater realm into what is Heaven. I have also seen torment in spirit in what i believe is hell. We have a choice dear brother. Please do not be deceived.