Recalled Experience of Death (RED)

[Sriram]

Hi everyone,

Here is an article about RED...Recalled Experience of Death. This is a new term for NDE's.....and probably more accurate.

https://bjgplife.com/recalled-experience-of-death/

***********
Recalled Experience of Death (RED) is the new terminology for an old phenomenon known as Near-Death Experience (NDE). Recently, researchers in the field of consciousness have decided to adopt RED due to its specificity. RED portrays more accurately the relationship between the non-functioning brain and consciousness than NDE, which has been extrapolated to report other human-altered states of consciousness, such as in meditation and psychedelic experiments.

There is no physiological explanation to RED’s six stages: (1) Perceived death and separation of the body (out-of-body experience – OBE); (2) Heading towards a destination (moving through a tunnel); (3) Reliving the recording of life that is educational (life review); (4) Being home again; (5) Returning back to life (entering the body); and (6) Reported effect after the experience, such loss of fear of death, seeking purpose and meaning in life.1

Despite the challenges to pin down the reality and meaning underlying RED, the studies on the subject make it impossible to deny the claims of awareness in relation to death.1

***********

Cheers.

Sriram

[Nearly Sane]

I've decided to call them, and probably more accurately, mind farts. Begging the question is not big and it's not clever.

[ProfessorDavey]

Hi everyone,

Here is an article about RED...Recalled Experience of Death. This is a new term for NDE's.....and probably more accurate.

https://bjgplife.com/recalled-experience-of-death/

***********
Recalled Experience of Death (RED) is the new terminology for an old phenomenon known as Near-Death Experience (NDE). Recently, researchers in the field of consciousness have decided to adopt RED due to its specificity. RED portrays more accurately the relationship between the non-functioning brain and consciousness than NDE, which has been extrapolated to report other human-altered states of consciousness, such as in meditation and psychedelic experiments.

There is no physiological explanation to RED’s six stages: (1) Perceived death and separation of the body (out-of-body experience – OBE); (2) Heading towards a destination (moving through a tunnel); (3) Reliving the recording of life that is educational (life review); (4) Being home again; (5) Returning back to life (entering the body); and (6) Reported effect after the experience, such loss of fear of death, seeking purpose and meaning in life.1

Despite the challenges to pin down the reality and meaning underlying RED, the studies on the subject make it impossible to deny the claims of awareness in relation to death.1

***********

Cheers.

Sriram

The term near death experience was already deeply misleading as the phenomena are replicated in other highly extreme physiological scenarios that are not close to, nor have anything to do with, death. But to imply these phenomena are recalled experiences of death is downright dishonest. The people in question have not died, did not die and therefore cannot recall death as they have not experienced death.

[Sriram]

The term near death experience was already deeply misleading as the phenomena are replicated in other highly extreme physiological scenarios that are not close to, nor have anything to do with, death. But to imply these phenomena are recalled experiences of death is downright dishonest. The people in question have not died, did not die and therefore cannot recall death as they have not experienced death.

I think we should leave that to the medical experts and researchers to decide.

[Nearly Sane]

I think we should leave that to the medical experts and researchers to decide.

So when you said 'probably more accurately', you were using your medical expertise?

[Maeght]

Hi everyone,

Here is an article about RED...Recalled Experience of Death. This is a new term for NDE's.....and probably more accurate.

https://bjgplife.com/recalled-experience-of-death/

***********
Recalled Experience of Death (RED) is the new terminology for an old phenomenon known as Near-Death Experience (NDE). Recently, researchers in the field of consciousness have decided to adopt RED due to its specificity. RED portrays more accurately the relationship between the non-functioning brain and consciousness than NDE, which has been extrapolated to report other human-altered states of consciousness, such as in meditation and psychedelic experiments.

There is no physiological explanation to RED’s six stages: (1) Perceived death and separation of the body (out-of-body experience – OBE); (2) Heading towards a destination (moving through a tunnel); (3) Reliving the recording of life that is educational (life review); (4) Being home again; (5) Returning back to life (entering the body); and (6) Reported effect after the experience, such loss of fear of death, seeking purpose and meaning in life.1

Despite the challenges to pin down the reality and meaning underlying RED, the studies on the subject make it impossible to deny the claims of awareness in relation to death.1

***********

Cheers.

Sriram

Near death seems more accurate to me.

[Outrider]

I think we should leave that to the medical experts and researchers to decide.

Wikipedia - Death is the irreversible cessation of all biological functions that sustain an organism.
Collins online - Death is the permanent end of the life of a person or animal.
Merriam-Webster - a permanent cessation of all vital (see VITAL sense 2a) functions : the end of life

Doesn't seem like anyone who's experienced 'death' is going to be in a position to recollect it. Near-death experiences, as has been pointed out, was something of a misnomer but wasn't intrinsically self-contradictory. 'Recalled experience of death' is just an oxymoron.

O.

[ProfessorDavey]

I think we should leave that to the medical experts and researchers to decide.

Indeed and genuine medical experts and bone fide researchers are clear that the phenomenon of so-called 'near death' experiences occur in situation that are not 'near death' let alone are consistent with someone who has died and would be recollecting death.

People without the requisite medical or research expertise but with some kind of 'spiritual' point to prove may think otherwise, but their opinions are merely that, opinions, not expert opinions nor evidence-based opinions. You use the evidence to justify your explanations and conclusions, you do not cherry pick and misrepresent evidence to justify a pre-formed dogma.

[Sriram]

Wikipedia - Death is the irreversible cessation of all biological functions that sustain an organism.
Collins online - Death is the permanent end of the life of a person or animal.
Merriam-Webster - a permanent cessation of all vital (see VITAL sense 2a) functions : the end of life

Doesn't seem like anyone who's experienced 'death' is going to be in a position to recollect it. Near-death experiences, as has been pointed out, was something of a misnomer but wasn't intrinsically self-contradictory. 'Recalled experience of death' is just an oxymoron.

O.

That is a circular argument. You can't define something unknown in a certain way and then deny the phenomenon when it exceeds that limited definition.

Change your definition...!

[Sriram]

Indeed and genuine medical experts and bone fide researchers are clear that the phenomenon of so-called 'near death' experiences occur in situation that are not 'near death' let alone are consistent with someone who has died and would be recollecting death.

People without the requisite medical or research expertise but with some kind of 'spiritual' point to prove may think otherwise, but their opinions are merely that, opinions, not expert opinions nor evidence-based opinions. You use the evidence to justify your explanations and conclusions, you do not cherry pick and misrepresent evidence to justify a pre-formed dogma.

Sam Parnia is a critical care medical expert. So are most of the people who have researched on this subject. You can't dub them all as people with a 'spiritual point to prove'.

[Maeght]

That is a circular argument. You can't define something unknown in a certain way and then deny the phenomenon when it exceeds that limited definition.

Change your definition...!

No, use a different word or phrase than death.

[ProfessorDavey]

Sam Parnia is a critical care medical expert. So are most of the people who have researched on this subject. You can't dub them all as people with a 'spiritual point to prove'.

But as far as I'm aware even he doesn't like to use the term 'near death experience', let alone 'Recalled experience of death'.

And while his observational studies of the experiences themselves are sound (albeit fail to demonstrate some aspects such as out of body phenomena) his interpretations are evidence-less and have been described as pseudoscience.

Interesting too that someone who has had a nigh-on 30 year career post qualification has only attained the level of associate professor (or senior lecturer in old money) - doesn't suggest that his research is highly regarded.

[jeremyp]

Hi everyone,

Here is an article about RED...Recalled Experience of Death. This is a new term for NDE's.....and probably more accurate.

https://bjgplife.com/recalled-experience-of-death/

***********
Recalled Experience of Death (RED) is the new terminology for an old phenomenon known as Near-Death Experience (NDE). Recently, researchers in the field of consciousness have decided to adopt RED due to its specificity. RED portrays more accurately the relationship between the non-functioning brain and consciousness than NDE, which has been extrapolated to report other human-altered states of consciousness, such as in meditation and psychedelic experiments.

There is no physiological explanation to RED’s six stages: (1) Perceived death and separation of the body (out-of-body experience – OBE); (2) Heading towards a destination (moving through a tunnel); (3) Reliving the recording of life that is educational (life review); (4) Being home again; (5) Returning back to life (entering the body); and (6) Reported effect after the experience, such loss of fear of death, seeking purpose and meaning in life.1

Despite the challenges to pin down the reality and meaning underlying RED, the studies on the subject make it impossible to deny the claims of awareness in relation to death.1

***********

Cheers.

Sriram

Changing the name of something won't magically make it what you want it to be.

If anybody is in a position to recall an experience, they were never dead.

[ProfessorDavey]

If anybody is in a position to recall an experience, they were never dead.

Indeed, which is why the term 'recalled experience of death' is deeply dishonest.

Near death experience would be reasonable if the phenomena, and their likely causes, were limited to experiences that are ... err ... near death. But they aren't - the phenomena are pretty well identical to other situations where there is extreme physiological stress, but is not near death - for example the effects of high g forces on fighter pilots.

[Maeght]

Indeed, which is why the term 'recalled experience of death' is deeply dishonest.

Near death experience would be reasonable if the phenomena, and their likely causes, were limited to experiences that are ... err ... near death. But they aren't - the phenomena are pretty well identical to other situations where there is extreme physiological stress, but is not near death - for example the effects of high g forces on fighter pilots.

But if it is an experience you are having because you are near to death it seems reasonable to call it that. An experience you have due to high G can be called something else.

[ProfessorDavey]

But if it is an experience you are having because you are near to death it seems reasonable to call it that. An experience you have due to high G can be called something else.

But that isn't really helpful if the phenomena are similar (which they appear to be) and the likely cause seems to be physiologically similar. To call them different terms suggests they are different things phenomenologically, physiologically and neurologically, which doesn't seem to be the case. The key point seems to be that the phenomena are triggered by extremely physiological stress which may, or may not, be associated with the process of dying. To ascribe the phenomena as 'near death' seems inappropriate to me at the phenomena also occur in similar physiologically stressed situations which are not near death.

[Outrider]

That is a circular argument.

It is neither circular nor even an argument.

You can't define something unknown in a certain way and then deny the phenomenon when it exceeds that limited definition.

The entire point of my post was taking no position on whether the phenomenon was accurately understood or not, it was that renaming it with an oxymoron doesn't help.

Change your definition...!

I cited dictionaries and encylopedias - it's not 'my' definition, it's the usage of the language. That's what 'death' means, the irreversible cessation of activity. Even given the limitation of the phrase 'near death experience' - where, as has been pointed out, the phenomenon doesn't appear to be intrinsically linked to the proximity of death and appears in other situations - it's still a better phrase than one which is literally self-contradictory.

O.

[Nearly Sane]

It is neither circular nor even an argument.

The entire point of my post was taking no position on whether the phenomenon was accurately understood or not, it was that renaming it with an oxymoron doesn't help.

I cited dictionaries and encylopedias - it's not 'my' definition, it's the usage of the language. That's what 'death' means, the irreversible cessation of activity. Even given the limitation of the phrase 'near death experience' - where, as has been pointed out, the phenomenon doesn't appear to be intrinsically linked to the proximity of death and appears in other situations - it's still a better phrase than one which is literally self-contradictory.

O.

And yet billions of people use the term death as meaning part of a process where the individual continues to exist. So in that usage it's not an oxymoron.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sriram,

That is a circular argument. You can't define something unknown in a certain way and then deny the phenomenon when it exceeds that limited definition.

No it isn’t. Death isn’t an unknown at all – it’s well defined and widely understood to mean the cessation of life. If people think they remember being dead they’re not remembering being dead – they’re remembering the experience of events that typically occur prior to being dead.

If a woman remembers the experience of sex she’s not also therefore remembering being pregnant, notwithstanding that sex generally occurs before pregnancy.

Can you see why not?
 

Change your definition...!

No, change yours. If you actually mean something other than death, don’t call it death.

[Enki]

Hi everyone,

Here is an article about RED...Recalled Experience of Death. This is a new term for NDE's.....and probably more accurate.

https://bjgplife.com/recalled-experience-of-death/

***********
Recalled Experience of Death (RED) is the new terminology for an old phenomenon known as Near-Death Experience (NDE). Recently, researchers in the field of consciousness have decided to adopt RED due to its specificity. RED portrays more accurately the relationship between the non-functioning brain and consciousness than NDE, which has been extrapolated to report other human-altered states of consciousness, such as in meditation and psychedelic experiments.

There is no physiological explanation to RED’s six stages: (1) Perceived death and separation of the body (out-of-body experience – OBE); (2) Heading towards a destination (moving through a tunnel); (3) Reliving the recording of life that is educational (life review); (4) Being home again; (5) Returning back to life (entering the body); and (6) Reported effect after the experience, such loss of fear of death, seeking purpose and meaning in life.1

Despite the challenges to pin down the reality and meaning underlying RED, the studies on the subject make it impossible to deny the claims of awareness in relation to death.1

***********

Cheers.

Sriram

This just looks like a modification of Parnia's 'TED', Sriram. I referred to Parnia's use of this term in 2021:

https://www.religionethics.co.uk/index.php?topic=18665.msg835436#msg835436

when it was used by Parnia in the context of a CA hospital environment. He emphasised that it was unclear as to whether recall could be affected by implicit memories. Here is the passage in full:

External awareness and internal cognitive activity may occur during CA. However, it is unclear whether explicit recall sufficiently describes the entirety of cognitive processes during CA, or whether implicit memories may also form. In some survivors, memories lead to greater life-meaning and a positive transformation, which contrasts with negative psychological outcomes such as PTSD. In this context, in place of NDE a more appropriate term might be transformative experience of death (TED). Further studies, are needed to delineate the role of implicit and explicit learning and how cognitive activity during CPR may relate to brain resuscitation quality and overall psychological outcomes.

https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/circ.140.suppl_2.387

And remember too that Parnia, in his Aware 2 study, accepted the possibility of confabulation in his findings. This is worth mentioning as your link pays particular attention to Parnia's single instance of recalled OBE(auditory) phenomena.

There are of course plenty of scientific explanations on what is occurring when a person experiences an NDE. Here, for instance, is just one:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/peace-of-mind-near-death/#:~:text=Although%20the%20specific%20causes%20of%20this%20part%20of,oxygen%20loss%20that%20are%20both%20common%20to%20dying

I think NDE is reasonably adequate even though such experiences can be undergone in a non-death situation. Certainly RED does nothing to elucidate the phenomenon because there is no evidence that such experiences occur when dead. It is I suppose a useful acronym for those who attach such experiences to certain beliefs.

[jeremyp]

Indeed, which is why the term 'recalled experience of death' is deeply dishonest.

And deliberately so, in my opinion.

Near death experience would be reasonable if the phenomena, and their likely causes, were limited to experiences that are ... err ... near death. But they aren't - the phenomena are pretty well identical to other situations where there is extreme physiological stress, but is not near death - for example the effects of high g forces on fighter pilots.

You could argue that high G forces on fighter pilots can be a near death experience because they do sometimes black out, fail to recover and crash.

Of course, that would make the term nearly meaningless. I could argue I am having a near death experience now as, if I was about three metres further West, I'd be plummeting towards the ground from outside my third floor flat.

[Sriram]

I think you guys are just being adamant.....out of fear that your fondly held views about life and death might come under question.

Death is an unknown and nobody....nobody....knows what it really is, regardless of what any of you might say to the contrary! 

Definitions of death are tentative and even medical experts are undecided on the point when death really occurs. It is not just Sam Parnia but many other doctors worldwide who are involved in the study of NDE's (RED'S).

RED's or NDE's are definitely a window into death and it is extremely foolish not to take them seriously.....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BL2Y43BHBnk (4 minutes)

[ProfessorDavey]

Death is an unknown and nobody....nobody....knows what it really is, regardless of what any of you might say to the contrary! 

Definitions of death are tentative and even medical experts are undecided on the point when death really occurs. It is not just Sam Parnia but many other doctors worldwide who are involved in the study of NDE's (RED'S).

I disagree entirely - I think you are misunderstanding the differences between the definition of death and an understanding of the processes leading to death and (if you are that way inclined) what happens after death. But the definition is very clear.

Death is defined as the irreversible cessation of all biological functions that sustain an organism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death

So firstly the notion of recall after death, with recall requiring the use of functioning physiological/neurological processes is an oxymoron as, by definition, if someone is death those attributes have been irreversibly lost, so if they have come back the person is not and was not dead.

Further, with the advances in medical practice there is a lot of challenge to the point at which death actually occurs, specifically when those processes have irreversible ceased. And there is debate over situations where someone is not dead by the definition, but has lost key functions (while others remain) that are deemed to be essential to the person, hence the various notions of 'brain death'. But you will note that these terms caveat brain death; brain-stem death; clinical death. They need to be caveated because in none of those cases is the organism actually dead according to the definition that requires irreversible cessation of all biological functions that sustain an organism.

RED's or NDE's are definitely a window into death and it is extremely foolish not to take them seriously.....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BL2Y43BHBnk (4 minutes)

No they don't - they may provide an interesting insight into the process of dying but they tell us nothing about being dead as in no case where someone is able to recount a NDE etc was that person dead, because, by definition they never demonstrated an irreversible cessation of all biological functions that sustain an organism because those biological functions came back.

[Enki]

I think you guys are just being adamant.....out of fear that your fondly held views about life and death might come under question.

Death is an unknown and nobody....nobody....knows what it really is, regardless of what any of you might say to the contrary! 

Definitions of death are tentative and even medical experts are undecided on the point when death really occurs. It is not just Sam Parnia but many other doctors worldwide who are involved in the study of NDE's (RED'S).

RED's or NDE's are definitely a window into death and it is extremely foolish not to take them seriously.....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BL2Y43BHBnk (4 minutes)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RnFmNAi5YU8

[Alan Burns]

The point in question here is evidence that conscious awareness can exist when there is no measurable brain activity.  In the vast majority of cases the cessation of brain activity is permanent, and there is no opportunity for the person to recount what happens when physical brain action ceases.  The recounted experiences of people who were brain dead and came back to physical life have several things in common - a feeling of love and joy which words cannot describe, a reluctance to return to their material bodies, an awareness of being greeted by past relatives or friends and being filled with vast amounts of knowledge in a short time period.