The cart was put before the horse--Basic problems in NDE research.

Abstract

The scientific approach to near-death experiences (NDE) had been impeded by both a lack of prospective studies and a sufficient amount of cases. Undoubtedly, the labour-intensive multicentric study by Sam Parnia and colleagues1Parnia S. AWARE – awareness during resuscitation – a prospective study.Resuscitation. 2014; 85: 1799-1805Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (98) Google Scholar was a chance to overcome these problems. Unfortunately, however, it is a merely phenomenological one. The study did not investigate whether there are certain personal traits which might lead people to have abnormal experiences in daily life and also predispose them to have NDE. Also, prolonged convalescence after reanimation as another possible risk factor for NDE has not been examined. Instead of investigating empirical questions about NDE, the study attempted to prove the existence of heaven. Aeons of philosophical discourses had already shown the failure of such efforts. Religion and science are distinct categories. Nevertheless, the authors tagged boards in certain rooms which the freed “consciousness” should detect. According to the authors the test failed because many reanimations were performed in other locations than the prepared rooms. But why should a freed consciousness in “unity with the universe” (Greyson's NDE scale) hang around in nothing but one little hospital room? If it is universal it should detect everything! Besides, items such as “unity with universe” or “understanding everything” resemble the neoplatonic and Gnostic concepts of emanation of world spirit, which had their heydays in the ether and magnetism theories of the 19th century. Moreover, other features of the study also show its lack of objectivity. For instance, all the patients who reported of experiences after clinical death were divided into those who had “real” NDE and those who did not. This is difficult to understand because there are no core criteria for defining the nature of NDE. The authors used Greyson's NDE scale to draw the distinction, but this is problematical because most items in it ask about a spiritual content. At least, a personal world view influenced definitions of items of his scale. NDE can never be a proof of the existence of the afterworld. Whatever odd reports people give of their NDE in cases of (merely) clinical death, we are always dealing with a living brain, still functioning even if severely impaired. No conflicts of interest to declare.