Scientific advances in the 20 th and 21 st centuries have led to a major evolution in the understanding of death. At the same time, for decades, people who have survived an encounter with death have recalled unexplained lucid episodes involving heightened consciousness and awareness. These have been reported using the popular -- yet scientifically ill-defined -- term “near-death experiences”.
A multidisciplinary team of national and international leaders, led by Sam Parnia, MD, PhD, director of Critical Care and Resuscitation Research at NYU Grossman School of Medicine, have published “ Guidelines and Standards for the Study of Death and Recalled Experiences of Death,” a multi-disciplinary consensus statement and proposed future directions in the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences . This study, which examined the accumulated scientific evidence to date, represents the first-ever, peer-reviewed consensus statement for the scientific study of recalled experiences surrounding death.
The researchers on the study represent many medical disciplines, including the neurosciences, critical care, psychiatry, psychology, social sciences and humanities, and represent many of the world’s most respected academic institutions including Harvard University, Baylor University, University of California Riverside, University of Virginia, Virginia Commonwealth University, Medical College of Wisconsin, and the Universities of Southampton and London.
Among their conclusions:
“Cardiac arrest is not a heart attack, but represents the final stage of a disease or event that causes a person to die,” lead author Parnia explains. “The advent of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) showed us that death is not an absolute state, rather, it’s a process that could potentially be reversed in some people even after it has started.
“What has enabled the scientific study of death,” he continues, “is that brain cells do not become irreversibly damaged within minutes of oxygen deprivation when the heart stops. Instead, they ‘die’ over hours of time. This is allowing scientists to objectively study the physiological and mental events that occur in relation to death”.
So far, the researchers say, evidence suggests that neither physiological nor cognitive processes end with death and that although systematic studies have not been able to absolutely prove the reality or meaning of patients’ experiences and claims of awareness in relation to death, it has been impossible to disclaim them either.
“Few studies have explored what happens when we die in an objective and scientific way, but these findings offer intriguing insights into how consciousness exists in humans and may pave the way for further research,” Parnia adds.
Besides Parnia, the multidisciplinary group of experts involved with this study were Stephen G. Post from the Department of Family, Population and Preventive Medicine, Stony Brook Medical Center, State University of New York at Stony Brook; Mathew T. Lee from The Institute for Quantitative Social Science, Harvard University; Sonja Lyubomirsky from the Department of Psychology, University of California, Riverside; Tom P. Aufderheide from the Department of Emergency Medicine, Medical College of Wisconsin; Charles D. Deakin from the Department of Anesthetics, University Hospital Southampton, Southampton, UK; Bruce Greyson from the Department of Psychiatry and Neurobehavioral Sciences, University of Virginia: Jeffrey Long from the Mary Bird Perkins Terrebonne General Medical Center Cancer Center, Houma, LA; Stephan Mayer from the Departments of Neurology and Neurosurgery, New York Medical College; Briana Locicero from the Department of Family, Population and Preventive Medicine, Stony Brook Medical Center, State University of New York at Stony Brook: Jeff Levin from the Institute for Studies of Religion, Baylor University; Anthony Bossis from the Department of Psychiatry, NYU Grossman School of Medicine; Everett Worthington from the Department of Psychology, Virginia Commonwealth University; Peter Fenwick from Department of Neurophysiology, Sleep and Epilepsy, Institute of Psychiatry, King’s College, London, UK; and Tara Keshavarz Shirazi, Anelly M. Gonzales, Elise L. Huppert and Analise Dickinson, all from Critical Care and Resuscitation Research, Department of Medicine, New York University Grossman School of Medicine.
About the Critical Care and Resuscitation Program at NYU Grossman School of Medicine
Research at the Critical Care and Resuscitation Research Program of the Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care, and Sleep Medicine, at NYU Grossman School of Medicine is advancing resuscitation techniques beyond CPR to improve the delivery of oxygen to the brain and thus lead to improved survival and quality of life for cardiac arrest patients. The program brings together a multi-disciplinary team of experts across many specialties, including neurology, cardiology, and intensive care. Together, they hope to improve cardiac arrest prevention and treatment, as well as address the impact of new scientific discoveries on our understanding of what happens at death.
Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences
Systematic review
People
Guidelines and standards for the study of death and recalled experiences of death--a multidisciplinary consensus statement and proposed future directions
18-Feb-2022