Frequently Asked Questions

Presuming the brain is dead during an NDE, then how does the brain remember what occurred during the NDE?

Update provided by Paul:

As I read about NDEs, it became obvious that the formation of an NDE memory required a new explanation because neurological activity in the brain could not be the answer. We know of cases where a person accurately describes events occurring during resuscitation efforts. We also know that resuscitation can occur as much as 10 minutes or more after the heart has stopped, and we know that electrical activity in the brain ceases about 90 seconds after the heart has stopped. Thus, NDE memories cannot be the result of neurological activity in the brain. Cells, on the other hand, continue to function 24 hours or more after the heart stops, leading to the notion that cells could be the memory device.

If so, the current answer you provide on your website would need to be adjusted. While it is an improvement over an earlier one, the phrase "consciousness is where the memories are stored" is highly recursive. Rather, it would seem that consciousness is that which processes the memories. Your answer also puts focus on the brain as being central to the memory issue. That may be an incorrect belief. While the brain has become the traditional belief for memory formation, any belief tends to blind one to other possibilities. We must consider the possibility that consciousness, being a metaphysical process and not a physical one, derives its awareness and understandings from the memory content of cells.

I do agree that the conscious retrieval of memories is not produced in a manner like reading data elements from a CD. Rather, it is more abstract; an emergent process, which is a metaphysical processing of the content of quantum entangled cells that collectively provide memories due to an entanglement that begins at the time of conception and continues, while increasing, with physical growth and added experiences. Just as quantum theory has shown materialism to be an incomplete understanding of nature, it seems that quantum theory will supersede materialistic attempts to explain consciousness. This has been suggested by Roger Penrose, author of The Emperor’s New Mind.

Two things lead to the justification of memory in cells: research and simple logic. First, the research. Consider the November 2024 article “Memory is Not Confined to Our Brains” (see https://www.sciencealert.com/memory-is-not-confined-to-our-brains-scientists-discover). As this article points out, “Multiple cycles of chemical activity through a repeated behavior is what triggers the memory-formation process among our neurons, encoding increasingly stronger memories. This phenomenon is called the massed-spaced effect and is highly conserved in all animals at both the cellular and behavioral levels.” It's not surprising here, too, that the article refers to neurons in the brain; that being the current belief system.

But the article goes on to say that exposing non-neural cells to similar chemical patterns produces the same memory effect. In particular, the genes associated with memory formation in neurons can also be activated in non-neural cells, given measures observed of a byproduct of the genes' expression called luciferase. The lead researcher, neuroscientist Nikolay Kukushkin notes, "The ability to learn from spaced repetition isn't unique to brain cells, but, in fact, might be a fundamental property of all cells." Other studies have also suggested that cells can be the source of memory. But, unlike the simplistic notion of a concept cell, the constituent nature of memories are more likely dispersed throughout many cells, in which recall is somewhat like parts of a hologram, where pieces are able to produce the entire image. This is described in Michael Talbot's book, The Holographic Universe.

As additional research, consider the May 2021 article "Can a Cell Remember?" in Scientific American (see https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/can-a-cell-remember/) pointing out evidence that the protist Stentor coeruleus has a memory. If touched a few times, it will remember the events and stop contracting for a few hours. The same memory capability can be seen in the Venus flytrap. It will distinguish between one touch and multiple touches on its trigger hairs. Similar decision-making from memory has been observed in both the paramecia (eukaryotic, with microtubules) and bacteria (prokaryotic, without), this difference being noted as a weakness in the Orch-Or theory, which relies on microtubules.

Further, as the Scientific American article points out, the single-celled paramecium can literally be trained, as can multiple-celled mycetozoan slime molds. But both of these have neither neurons nor a brain. We also know that jellyfish, sea urchins, starfish, oysters, clams, and other sea creatures display the use of memory in their behaviors, but they have no brain. In addition, studies at the University of Missouri tell us that plants exhibit memories, as discussed in the article "Plants have a memory!" (see https://www.murr.missouri.edu/plants-have-a-memory/). Here, too, plants have neither neurons nor a brain. Thus, by simple logic, we know the brain cannot be the sole source of memories.

Further evidence of memory in cells comes from studies of offspring which have inherited not only the genetic traits of its parents but also their memories. For instance, a calf born of a cow that has experienced cattle grids will not try to cross one. In fact, the calf won't even try to cross lines painted on the ground that resemble a cattle grid. Inherited memory has also been found in mouse pups. When female mice were impregnated with the sperm of male mice which were conditioned with an electrical shock after a bright light flash, the pups of the female mouse responded to the light flashes just as the conditioned male mice responded. Thus, offspring inherit memories that the parents developed by experience.

Studies at all levels of life tell us that non-neural cells and networks of cells can retain memories. Perhaps it's these genetically inherited memories that explain NDE events that include knowledge of one's ancestors. Inherited memories may even suggest reincarnation to some. While science may eventually understand how memories are formed through chemical processes, the materialistic approach to consciousness will never explain how those memories can be recalled, understood, and form the basis for conscious decision-making. Some bodily functions are dependent upon neurological activity in the brain, of course, but consciousness itself can only be a metaphysical aspect of reality that transcends materialism. This is the same theme suggested by Steve Taylor, author of Spiritual Science, and David Bohm's ontological concepts of quantum theory in Wholeness and the Implicate Order.

====================================================================
There have many relatively recent studies on consciousness. One current theory is that consciousness is where the memories are stored, not the brain. Others believe memory is produced by the brain. Many scientists have postulated that as an information storage unit the brain cannot possibly hold all the information. Therefore, the brain is more of an accessing unit much like a radio receiver. Additional findings have shown that the way we remember is not as a computer disk drive, but rather we store a core memory attached to an emotion and then file it in an concept area in the brain. When we retrieve our memories, we are programmed to "fill in the gaps." Therefore brain memories rarely are 100% totally accurate. However, that being said, the NDEs report 100% life reviews of every thought, deed, and how we made others feel. This is the computer hard drive - the consciousness that survives death. My guess is that it is such an intense experience that it may create in the brain what is known as a "flashbulb moment." These are times that the brain takes a picture of a particular instance, usually occurring in times of heightened sensory and emotional input or life-threatening moments. These memories are ingrained in the brain and the person can recall like it happened yesterday.

Are NDEs caused by false memories?

It has been suggested that NDEs are not memories of events that actually happened, but rather are "false memories," products of the imagination. This idea comes in part from recent psychological studies suggesting that it is possible to implant false memories into research subjects so that they truly believe imaginary events actually occurred to them. However, those psychological studies that implant false memories take considerable effort to suggest to the subject that the experience really did happen, using repetition and encouragement of suggestible children to recall experiences suggested by the authoritative experimenter. If that model were used to explain NDE, who is it that is making those efforts to implant the false memories in NDErs, repeatedly suggesting to them that they had an NDE?

Although I do not think implanted "false memories" are a plausible explanation for NDEs, there are real questions about how to interpret NDE accounts, especially from people who do not recall their NDEs immediately, but seem to remember their NDEs only after some time has passed. For example, in my research with patients hospitalized for attempted suicide, I identified for monthly follow-up interviews those who described NDEs as a result of the suicide attempt and a matched control group who denied having had NDEs. There were a few "control" patients who, on follow-up visits, later described NDEs in the course of their initial suicide attempt. They all told me that they simply didn't trust me sufficiently in our initial interview to share the NDE.

This should not be surprising, because many of them were concerned about being regarded as crazy - particularly when they were being interviewed by a psychiatrist shortly after a suicide attempt, when they were trying to gain release from the hospital! For example, one patient who initially denied any memories of being unconscious later told me about watching her unconscious body being resuscitated after her overdose. A month later, she said that, now that she knew I wouldn't misuse the information, she could trust me with what REALLY happened, and she told me about kundalini-like sensations as she flowed out of the crown of her head to leave her body. A month after that, she told me that NOW she trusted me enough to tell me about her meeting with her deceased father. The next month it was her encounter with Jesus. And so it went, with new revelations in each interview. I suspect there were some parts of her NDE that were so personal that I never would have heard about them if the study had lasted a lifetime.

The question becomes: How are we do differentiate (a) patients genuinely increasing their trust in us and opening up more and more from (b) patients making up stories after the fact (consciously or unconsciously) and retroactively attributing them to the time of the initial event? There is no easy answer to this question. There are some preliminary studies suggesting that functional MRI imaging of the brain may be able to differentiate "true" from "false" memories, but short of subjecting NDErs to fMRIs, we don't have a technology for distinguishing memories of real events from imagination. However, unless we have some reason to suspect that an NDEr is highly suggestible AND has had some strong motivation to imagine having had an NDE, there is no rational reason to assume that the NDE is a "false memory."

A special thanks to Dr. Bruce Greyson, one of the founding fathers of NDE research. Bonner-Lowry Professor of Personality Studies, Department of Psychiatric Medicine, University of Virginia Health System

Another key part of the longitudinal study by van Lommel and cited in the Lancet, was the effect of time, memory and suppression of the NDE during the integration process. The commentary in the Lancet talks of NDEs being the result of false memories. Interestingly, if this were true, then this rationale could not explain why the study found that people could recall their NDE exactly over the span of a 2-year and an 8-year period. Id. at 2041. Moreover, the skeptic commentary quoted memory studies of children, but lacked information on adults. The cardiac arrest population consisted of adults rather than children. There was a profound lack of explanation as to what constitutes false memory, and many in the field of psychology agree that false memory is credited with filling in small gaps in memory rather than inventing whole stories. Near Death Experience In Survivors of Cardiac Arrest: A Prospective Study in the Netherlands, Pim van Lommel, et al, THE LANCET • Vol 358 • December 15, 2001.

Why do some people believe that NDEs are not real?

Although there are many answers to this multifaceted question, part of the controversy stems from the way science proves observed phenomena. "Science" is defined as the process used to find truth. Best Evidence, Schmicker, Michael, pg 37. "In contrast, 'Scientism' is a philosophy of materialism, masquerading as scientific truth. Paranormal research, has used the process of science to prove the existence of a variety of phenomena, that simply doesn't fit within Scientism's philosophy of materialism. If evidence conflicts with philosophy, the evidence should not be dismissed; instead, the philosophy should be revised." Id.

What are some observations regarding skeptic arguments?

"Skeptics have done valuable and respectable work in challenging paranormal claims." Best Evidence, Schmicker, Michael, pg 40. Healthy skepticism helps to find the truth. A true skeptic is someone who "express[es] uncertainty or doubt, non belief rather than disbelief. In contrast, too many skeptics and debunkers are disbelievers, offering answers rather than questions." Id. 

"Skeptics point to the possibility of errors in observation," but there are many documented cases involving "multiple, independent witnesses whose testimony agrees." Id. at 36.

"Skeptics warn that some people who report paranormal events may be biased towards belief in their reality." The counterargument is that "many skeptics bring an equally unscientific bias towards disbelief to their investigations - a prejudice so strong that they won't accept a phenomenon even if they personally witness or experience it." Id.

Skeptics argue that people who report paranormal events are only looking for attention. The counter argument is "most eyewitnesses of a strange, paranormal event have little to gain and much to lose by reporting them. They're usually branded as wackos and nut cases." "It's just not socially acceptable to profess a belief in a non-material world beyond the five senses. As a result, under-reporting of these phenomena is more likely than over-reporting." Id.

Are NDEs caused by Hallucinations?

NDEs are not HALLUCINATIONS: Outside of the control group of 121, Mel Morse interviewed 37 children that had been treated with mind-altering medication (anesthetic agents, narcotics, Valium, Thorazine, Holdol, Dilantin, antidepressants, mood elevators, and painkillers. None of the children experienced an NDE or anything close to an NDE. One child specifically due to the nature of her medical condition, was helped to hallucinate. Nothing she described resembled an NDE. Further, she told Morse that she was fully cognizant of being hypnotized. Closer to the Light, Learning from the Near-Death Experiences of Children, Melvin Morse M.D., with Paul Perry, Ballantine Books 1991, pg 23-24.

Do you think that hospice patients who see deceased relatives are merely hallucinating on morphine?

My reply is that I have observed people who are hallucinating on medications. During those hallucinations they can not hold a logical conversation with me. They are completely lost in their hallucinations.

In contrast, I have interrupted dying people who were conversing with deceased relatives that I could not see. When interrupted, they could talk with me in a completely rational fashion and make complete sense. When we completed our conversation, they went back to talking with their deceased relatives, clearly preferring their company to mine at that moment! Later they are often glad to tell me about the conversations that they were having with their deceased relatives when I interrupted them.

In my mind there is a profound difference in the recollections of a person who has been hallucinating and one who has been conversing with deceased relatives.

A special thanks to Dr. Pam Kircher, a hospice doctor and was a member of the IANDS board of directors.

Does DMT cause NDEs? Is it true that experiences occuring from using DMT are the same as a NDE?

DMT does not cause NDEs. There is no reason to believe that NDEs are just having an ”NDE trip”.

DMT experiences are substantially different from NDE experiences. One problem that makes some of the experiences look similar is that the newer experiences have utilized the popular language of NDE. But if you go back to the older experiences - such as those in the 1990s or earlier, you'll see that there is very little comparison.

You can objectively compare the experiences by reading sequentially shared experiences from both links. Here are first-person sequentially shared DMT experiences (without concomitant use of other substances): Click here to read DMT Experiences.

You can compare DMT experiences with sequentially shared first-person NDE experiences: Click here to read about NDEs

Does a reaction to "ether" chemically simulate a tunnel vision so commonly seen in NDEs?

Ether notoriously can cause a spinning feeling which can be nauseating. This ether experience can be perceived as a tunnel. Usually the ether 'tunnel' experience is different from the tunnel experience of NDEs where there is no 'vertigo' sensation. Another distinguishing feature is that the NDE tunnel experience almost always is a highly lucid experience with full conscious alertness. Ether 'tunnels' are just before you go to sleep, and would not be expected to be lucid.

A special thanks to Dr. Jeffrey Long, a radiation oncology doctor, former member of the IANDS board of directors.

What is the difference between the psychiatric problem of seeing double and the out of body experience when the NDEr describes seeing themselves?

The psychiatric syndrome of autoscopy is the characteristic "doppelganger" of literature. In classical autoscopy, the person's consciousness remains in his or her physical body, and the person sees a "double" of him- or herself, which usually imitates all the actions of the physical body. Most typically, the autoscopic "double" is hazy, colorless, and transparent, and only includes the face and shoulders, rather than the whole body. The "double" may move toward or away from the physical body, and the person having the autoscopic vision is usually quite sad.

By contrast, in the NDE, the person's consciousness is not in his or her physical body, but is rather in the "double." The person sees his or her own physical body from the point of view of the "double," and the physical body is usually motionless, while the person moves about in the double. The vision of the physical body appears as the whole body, and appears real and lifelike. Sadness is quite rare in NDEs.

A special thanks to Dr. Bruce Greyson, one of the founding fathers of NDE research. Bonner-Lowry Professor of Personality Studies, Department of Psychiatric Medicine, University of Virginia Health System

Are NDEs caused from sleep deprivation, bad dreams, or the subconscious awareness of surgery?

Melvin Morse published 3 articles in the AMA’s pediatric journal as a result of his studies. The scientists and physicians who reviewed his protocol were very complimentary about research design and scientific validity of the results. Closer to the Light, Learning from the Near-Death Experiences of Children, Melvin Morse M.D., with Paul Perry, Ballantine Books 1991, Pg 49 . His findings from his carefully designed research eliminated the theory that NDEs are the result of drugs or sleep deprivation or that they are merely bad dreams or the subconscious awareness of surgery. Id. at pg 46.

Are there any medical or emotional explanations for NDE, such as lack of oxygen to the brain or images produced from fear chemicals of a dying brain?

The van Lommel study cited in the Lancet, can be cited for major NDE scientific findings, the largest being that NDEs are not medically explicable. pg. 2039. Van Lommel proved under rigid methodology that the occurrence of the NDE was not associated with “duration of cardiac arrest or unconsciousness, medication, or fear of death prior to the cardiac arrest.” Near Death Experience In Survivors of Cardiac Arrest: A Prospective Study in the Netherlands, Pim van Lommel, et al, THE LANCET • Vol 358 • December 15, 2001.

Given the similarity in physiological make-up of the sample population, one would expect that most of the 344 patients should experience an NDE. pg. 2039 This would take into account the skeptic argument of cerebral anoxia (dying brain cells). However, that is not the case. The findings were that 18% of the 344 cardiac arrest patients had an NDE, with 12% of the 18% reporting a “core experience.” Id. Therefore, NDE is not correlated with physiological causes of death. However, the study did find that age might play a factor in the occurrence of NDEs in that younger experiencers were more likely to have an NDE and more likely to have a core experience. Id. at 2043. Near Death Experience In Survivors of Cardiac Arrest: A Prospective Study in the Netherlands, Pim van Lommel, et al, THE LANCET • Vol 358 • December 15, 2001.

The same argument pertaining to physiological make-up could be made for those in the sample population who were psychologically afraid of death right before the cardiac arrest. However, there was no difference between those who were afraid and reported an NDE as opposed to those who were afraid and did not report an NDE. Id. at 2039. Therefore, NDE doesn’t appear to be caused by emotional make-up such as fear. Near Death Experience In Survivors of Cardiac Arrest: A Prospective Study in the Netherlands, Pim van Lommel, et al, THE LANCET • Vol 358 • December 15, 2001.

ANOTHER STUDY The children in Morse's study were also hypoxic, had acid-based balance disturbances, and had high CO2 levels, and every combination you could imagine. Yet they had nothing like an NDE. Closer to the Light, Learning from the Near-Death Experiences of Children, Melvin Morse M.D., with Paul Perry, Ballantine Books 1991 Pg 48

How could a clear consciousness outside one's body be experienced at the moment that brain no longer functions during a period of clinical death with flat EEG?

But the truth is that nobody knows when the NDEs reported by these patients occurred. Was it really during the period of flat EEG or might they have occurred as the patients rapidly entered or gradually recovered from that state? THE LANCET * Vol 358 * December 15, 2001 COMMENTARY p. 2010

This is perhaps one of the more ludicrous skeptical arguments. All one has to do is to read the experiences on the website. Notice that many describe the out of body part of the experience. It is hard to believe that a person can describe events (many times in the operating room) that occur after death. For instance, we had one experiencer talk of floating down the hall and hearing word for word what the nurses were saying about her death. We also have several reports of experiencers reporting word for word how relatives reacted to news of their death. 

Are NDEs caused by misfiring neurons in a dying brain?

Although, van Lommel could not find any medically explicable explanation for why NDEs occur, he did acknowledge that the neurological processes had to play a part in the NDE, noting similarities between various other phenomena such as electrical stimulation of the temporal lobe of the brain. Id. at 2044. However, he also commented on the fragmented and randomness of the memories derived by these other mechanisms. Id. Only the NDE had clear recall in a sequential order as evidenced by the life review. Near Death Experience In Survivors of Cardiac Arrest: A Prospective Study in the Netherlands, Pim van Lommel, et al, THE LANCET • Vol 358 • December 15, 2001, 2044.

The commentary in the Lancet talks of NDEs being the result of false memories. Interestingly, if this were true, then this rationale could not explain why the study found that people could recall their NDE exactly over the span of a 2-year and an 8-year period. Id. at 2041. a misfiring brain after death could not explain the perfect memory recall and the sequential occurrence of events.

Reserved

Donec sit amet eros. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Mauris fermentum dictum magna. Sed laoreet aliquam leo. Ut tellus dolor, dapibus eget, elementum vel, cursus eleifend, elit. Aenean auctor wisi et.

Reserved

Donec sit amet eros. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Mauris fermentum dictum magna. Sed laoreet aliquam leo. Ut tellus dolor, dapibus eget, elementum vel, cursus eleifend, elit. Aenean auctor wisi et.

Neque porro quisquam est?

Donec sit amet eros. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Mauris fermentum dictum magna. Sed laoreet aliquam leo. Ut tellus dolor, dapibus eget, elementum vel, cursus eleifend, elit. Aenean auctor wisi et.

Pellentesque sed dolor?

Donec sit amet eros. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Mauris fermentum dictum magna. Sed laoreet aliquam leo. Ut tellus dolor, dapibus eget, elementum vel, cursus eleifend, elit. Aenean auctor wisi et.

Aenean auctor wisi et urna?

Donec sit amet eros. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Mauris fermentum dictum magna. Sed laoreet aliquam leo. Ut tellus dolor, dapibus eget, elementum vel, cursus eleifend, elit. Aenean auctor wisi et.

Ut tellus dolor, dapibus eget?

Donec sit amet eros. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Mauris fermentum dictum magna. Sed laoreet aliquam leo. Ut tellus dolor, dapibus eget, elementum vel, cursus eleifend, elit. Aenean auctor wisi et urna.

Lorem ipsum dolor ?

Donec sit amet eros. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Mauris fermentum dictum magna. Sed laoreet aliquam leo. Ut tellus dolor, dapibus eget, elementum vel, cursus eleifend, elit. Aenean auctor wisi et.

Aenean auctor wisi et urna?

Donec sit amet eros. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Mauris fermentum dictum magna. Sed laoreet aliquam leo. Ut tellus dolor, dapibus eget, elementum vel, cursus eleifend, elit. Aenean auctor wisi et.

Ut tellus dolor, dapibus eget?

Donec sit amet eros. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Mauris fermentum dictum magna. Sed laoreet aliquam leo. Ut tellus dolor, dapibus eget, elementum vel, cursus eleifend, elit. Aenean auctor wisi et urna.

Lorem ipsum dolor ?

Donec sit amet eros. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Mauris fermentum dictum magna. Sed laoreet aliquam leo. Ut tellus dolor, dapibus eget, elementum vel, cursus eleifend, elit. Aenean auctor wisi et.

Aenean auctor wisi et urna?

Donec sit amet eros. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Mauris fermentum dictum magna. Sed laoreet aliquam leo. Ut tellus dolor, dapibus eget, elementum vel, cursus eleifend, elit. Aenean auctor wisi et.

Mauris fermentum dictum?

Donec sit amet eros. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Mauris fermentum dictum magna. Sed laoreet aliquam leo. Ut tellus dolor, dapibus eget, elementum vel, cursus eleifend, elit. Aenean auctor wisi et.

Aliquam dapibus tincidunt metus?

Donec sit amet eros. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Mauris fermentum dictum magna. Sed laoreet aliquam leo. Ut tellus dolor, dapibus eget, elementum vel, cursus eleifend, elit. Aenean auctor wisi et urna.

Neque porro quisquam est?

Donec sit amet eros. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Mauris fermentum dictum magna. Sed laoreet aliquam leo. Ut tellus dolor, dapibus eget, elementum vel, cursus eleifend, elit. Aenean auctor wisi et.

Pellentesque sed dolor?

Donec sit amet eros. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Mauris fermentum dictum magna. Sed laoreet aliquam leo. Ut tellus dolor, dapibus eget, elementum vel, cursus eleifend, elit. Aenean auctor wisi et.

Lorem ipsum dolor?

Donec sit amet eros. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Mauris fermentum dictum magna. Sed laoreet aliquam leo. Ut tellus dolor, dapibus eget, elementum vel, cursus eleifend, elit. Aenean auctor wisi et.