RENCANA BERITA INI SAYA PETIK DARI TIME.COM, IA MEMPERLIHATKAN CONTOH MANUSIA SEDANG BERUSAHA MENCABAR TUHAN. DENGAN MEMBACA ARTIKEL INI KITA FAHAM PERJALANAN KAJIAN INI BUKAN SAHAJA TENTANG APA YANG BERLAKU BILA KITA MATI SEKEJAP SEPERTI DALAM KES SERANGAN JANTUNG UMPAMANYA, TETAPI KAJIAN INI SEBENARNYA UNTUK MENCARI KAEDAH MENGHIDUPKAN MEREKA YANG SUDAH MATI SEBENARNYA. JAUH BERTENTANGAN DARI AJARAN ISLAM BAHAWA SELEPAS MATI KITA AKAN BERHADAPAN PULA HISAB AMALAN KITA DI DUNIA DAN MAUT SERTA AJAL ITU TERLETAK DI TANGAN TUHAN. PERSOALANNYA, ADAKAH KITA BERSEDIA MENERIMA SAINS SEPERTI INI?
What Happens When We Die?
By M.J. STEPHEY Tue Sep 23, 6:40 PM ET
A fellow at New York City's Weill Cornell Medical Center, Dr. Sam Parnia is one of the
world's leading experts on the scientific study of death. Last week Parnia and his colleagues
at the Human Consciousness Project announced their first major undertaking: a 3-year
exploration of the biology behind "out-of-body" experiences. The study, known as AWARE
(AWAreness during REsuscitation), involves the collaboration of 25 major medical centers
through Europe, Canada and the U.S. and will examine some 1,500 survivors of cardiac arrest.
TIME spoke with Parnia about the project's origins, its skeptics and the difference between
the mind and the brain.
world's leading experts on the scientific study of death. Last week Parnia and his colleagues
at the Human Consciousness Project announced their first major undertaking: a 3-year
exploration of the biology behind "out-of-body" experiences. The study, known as AWARE
(AWAreness during REsuscitation), involves the collaboration of 25 major medical centers
through Europe, Canada and the U.S. and will examine some 1,500 survivors of cardiac arrest.
TIME spoke with Parnia about the project's origins, its skeptics and the difference between
the mind and the brain.
What sort of methods will this project use to try and verify people's claims of "near-death" experience?
When your heart stops beating, there is no blood getting to your brain. And so what happens
is that within about 10 sec., brain activity ceases - as you would imagine. Yet
paradoxically, 10% or 20% of people who are then brought back to life from that period, which
may be a few minutes or over an hour, will report having consciousness. So the key thing here
is, Are these real, or is it some sort of illusion? So the only way to tell is to have
pictures only visible from the ceiling and nowhere else, because they claim they can see
everything from the ceiling. So if we then get a series of 200 or 300 people who all were
clinically dead, and yet they're able to come back and tell us what we were doing and were
able see those pictures, that confirms consciousness really was continuing even though the
brain wasn't functioning.
is that within about 10 sec., brain activity ceases - as you would imagine. Yet
paradoxically, 10% or 20% of people who are then brought back to life from that period, which
may be a few minutes or over an hour, will report having consciousness. So the key thing here
is, Are these real, or is it some sort of illusion? So the only way to tell is to have
pictures only visible from the ceiling and nowhere else, because they claim they can see
everything from the ceiling. So if we then get a series of 200 or 300 people who all were
clinically dead, and yet they're able to come back and tell us what we were doing and were
able see those pictures, that confirms consciousness really was continuing even though the
brain wasn't functioning.
How does this project relate to society's perception of death?
People commonly perceive death as being a moment - you're either dead or you're alive. And
that's a social definition we have. But the clinical definition we use is when the heart
stops beating, the lungs stop working, and as a consequence the brain itself stops working.
When doctors shine a light into someone's pupil, it's to demonstrate that there is no reflex
present. The eye reflex is mediated by the brain stem, and that's the area that keeps us
alive; if that doesn't work, then that means that the brain itself isn't working. At that
point, I'll call a nurse into the room so I can certify that this patient is dead. Fifty
years ago, people couldn't survive after that.
that's a social definition we have. But the clinical definition we use is when the heart
stops beating, the lungs stop working, and as a consequence the brain itself stops working.
When doctors shine a light into someone's pupil, it's to demonstrate that there is no reflex
present. The eye reflex is mediated by the brain stem, and that's the area that keeps us
alive; if that doesn't work, then that means that the brain itself isn't working. At that
point, I'll call a nurse into the room so I can certify that this patient is dead. Fifty
years ago, people couldn't survive after that.
How is technology challenging the perception that death is a moment?
Nowadays, we have technology that's improved so that we can bring people back to life. In
fact, there are drugs being developed right now - who knows if they'll ever make it to the
market - that may actually slow down the process of brain-cell injury and death. Imagine you
fast-forward to 10 years down the line; and you've given a patient, whose heart has just
stopped, this amazing drug; and actually what it does is, it slows everything down so that
the things that would've happened over an hour, now happen over two days. As medicine
progresses, we will end up with lots and lots of ethical questions.
But what is happening to the individual at that time? What's really going on? Because there
is a lack of blood flow, the cells go into a kind of a frenzy to keep themselves alive. And
within about 5 min. or so they start to damage or change. After an hour or so the damage is
so great that even if we restart the heart again and pump blood, the person can no longer be
viable, because the cells have just been changed too much. And then the cells continue to
change so that within a couple of days the body actually decomposes. So it's not a moment;
it's a process that actually begins when the heart stops and culminates in the complete loss
of the body, the decompositions of all the cells. However, ultimately what matters is, What's
going on to a person's mind? What happens to the human mind and consciousness during death?
Does that cease immediately as soon as the heart stops? Does it cease activity within the
first 2 sec., the first 2 min.? Because we know that cells are continuously changing at that
time. Does it stop after 10 min., after half an hour, after an hour? And at this point we
don't know.
fact, there are drugs being developed right now - who knows if they'll ever make it to the
market - that may actually slow down the process of brain-cell injury and death. Imagine you
fast-forward to 10 years down the line; and you've given a patient, whose heart has just
stopped, this amazing drug; and actually what it does is, it slows everything down so that
the things that would've happened over an hour, now happen over two days. As medicine
progresses, we will end up with lots and lots of ethical questions.
But what is happening to the individual at that time? What's really going on? Because there
is a lack of blood flow, the cells go into a kind of a frenzy to keep themselves alive. And
within about 5 min. or so they start to damage or change. After an hour or so the damage is
so great that even if we restart the heart again and pump blood, the person can no longer be
viable, because the cells have just been changed too much. And then the cells continue to
change so that within a couple of days the body actually decomposes. So it's not a moment;
it's a process that actually begins when the heart stops and culminates in the complete loss
of the body, the decompositions of all the cells. However, ultimately what matters is, What's
going on to a person's mind? What happens to the human mind and consciousness during death?
Does that cease immediately as soon as the heart stops? Does it cease activity within the
first 2 sec., the first 2 min.? Because we know that cells are continuously changing at that
time. Does it stop after 10 min., after half an hour, after an hour? And at this point we
don't know.
What was your first interview like with someone who had reported an out-of-body experience?
Eye-opening and very humbling. Because what you see is that, first of all, they are
completely genuine people who are not looking for any kind of fame or attention. In many
cases they haven't even told anybody else about it because they're afraid of what people will
think of them. I have about 500 or so cases of people that I've interviewed since I first
started out more than 10 years ago. It's the consistency of the experiences, the reality of
what they were describing. I managed to speak to doctors and nurses who had been present who
said these patients had told them exactly what had happened, and they couldn't explain it. I
actually documented a few of those in my book What Happens When We Die because I wanted
people to get both angles - not just the patients' side but also the doctors' side - and see
how it feels for the doctors to have a patient come back and tell them what was going on.
There was a cardiologist that I spoke with who said he hasn't told anyone else about it
because he has no explanation for how this patient could have been able to describe in detail
what he had said and done. He was so freaked out by it that he just decided not to think
about it anymore.
completely genuine people who are not looking for any kind of fame or attention. In many
cases they haven't even told anybody else about it because they're afraid of what people will
think of them. I have about 500 or so cases of people that I've interviewed since I first
started out more than 10 years ago. It's the consistency of the experiences, the reality of
what they were describing. I managed to speak to doctors and nurses who had been present who
said these patients had told them exactly what had happened, and they couldn't explain it. I
actually documented a few of those in my book What Happens When We Die because I wanted
people to get both angles - not just the patients' side but also the doctors' side - and see
how it feels for the doctors to have a patient come back and tell them what was going on.
There was a cardiologist that I spoke with who said he hasn't told anyone else about it
because he has no explanation for how this patient could have been able to describe in detail
what he had said and done. He was so freaked out by it that he just decided not to think
about it anymore.
Why do you think there is such resistance to studies like yours?
Because we're pushing through the boundaries of science, working against assumptions and
perceptions that have been fixed. A lot of people hold this idea that, well, when you die,
you die; that's it. Death is a moment - you know you're either dead or alive. All these
things are not scientifically valid, but they're social perceptions. If you look back at the
end of the 19th century, physicists at that time had been working with Newtonian laws of
motion, and they really felt they had all the answers to everything that was out there in the
universe. When we look at the world around us, Newtonian physics is perfectly sufficient. It
explains most things that we deal with. But then it was discovered that actually when you
look at motion at really small levels - beyond the level of the atoms - Newton's laws no
longer apply. A new physics was needed, hence, we eventually ended up with quantum physics.
It caused a lot of controversy - even Einstein himself didn't believe in it.
Now, if you look at the mind, consciousness, and the brain, the assumption that the mind and
brain are the same thing is fine for most circumstances, because in 99% of circumstances we
can't separate the mind and brain; they work at the exactly the same time. But then there are
certain extreme examples, like when the brain shuts down, that we see that this assumption
may no longer seem to hold true. So a new science is needed in the same way that we had to
have a new quantum physics. The CERN particle accelerator may take us back to our roots. It
may take us back to the first moments after the Big Bang, the very beginning. With our study,
for the first time, we have the technology and the means to be able to investigate this. To
see what happens at the end for us. Does something continue?
perceptions that have been fixed. A lot of people hold this idea that, well, when you die,
you die; that's it. Death is a moment - you know you're either dead or alive. All these
things are not scientifically valid, but they're social perceptions. If you look back at the
end of the 19th century, physicists at that time had been working with Newtonian laws of
motion, and they really felt they had all the answers to everything that was out there in the
universe. When we look at the world around us, Newtonian physics is perfectly sufficient. It
explains most things that we deal with. But then it was discovered that actually when you
look at motion at really small levels - beyond the level of the atoms - Newton's laws no
longer apply. A new physics was needed, hence, we eventually ended up with quantum physics.
It caused a lot of controversy - even Einstein himself didn't believe in it.
Now, if you look at the mind, consciousness, and the brain, the assumption that the mind and
brain are the same thing is fine for most circumstances, because in 99% of circumstances we
can't separate the mind and brain; they work at the exactly the same time. But then there are
certain extreme examples, like when the brain shuts down, that we see that this assumption
may no longer seem to hold true. So a new science is needed in the same way that we had to
have a new quantum physics. The CERN particle accelerator may take us back to our roots. It
may take us back to the first moments after the Big Bang, the very beginning. With our study,
for the first time, we have the technology and the means to be able to investigate this. To
see what happens at the end for us. Does something continue?
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment