Reply #62: Have you read the article cited by the OP?

[Jim__]

The only information in the article about Dr. Nelson's idea is:

Dr. Kevin Nelson, a neurologist in Lexington, Kentucky, studies near-death experiences and says they're not imagined. The explanation, he says, lies in the brain itself.

"These are real experiences. And they're experiences that happen at a time of medical crisis and danger," Nelson said.

Humans have a lot of reflexes that help keep us alive, part of the "fight or flight" response that arises when we're confronted with danger.

Nelson thinks that near-death experiences are part of the dream mechanism and that the person having the experience is in a REM, or "rapid eye movement," state.

"Part of our 'fight or flight' reflexes to keep us alive includes the switch into the REM state of consciousness," he said.

During REM sleep, there is increased brain activity and visual stimulation. Intense dreaming occurs as a result.

And the bright light so many people claim to see?

"The activation of the visual system caused by REM is causing the bright lights," Nelson said.

And the tunnel people speak of, he says, is lack of blood flow to the eye. "The eye, the retina of the eye, is one of the most exquisitely sensitive tissues to a loss of blood flow. So when blood flow does not reach the eye, vision fails, and darkness ensues from the periphery to the center. And that is very likely causing the tunnel effect."

Nelson is doing studies now to prove that the same effect results from fainting.

"The most common cause of near-death experience in my research group is fainting. Upwards of 100 million Americans have fainted. That means probably tens of millions of Americans have had these unusual experiences."

That's it. Notice that the article states: Nelson thinks that near-death experiences are part of the dream mechanism and that the person having the experience is in a REM, or "rapid eye movement," state.

My first post on this, post #29, states that I'm waiting for further explanation before I make up my mind about NDEs. A quite simple statement really. The first response to that asked me how people can see, essentially, without eyes. My response was that we are not required to accept either Dr. Nelson's hypothesis or one other hypothesis. That is my answer because that is what I am saying. The article really does not give us enough information to decide. I was really trying to avoid this round and round in circles about peripheral issues. It does not matter what I believe may be happening. I am not going to be the one to figure it out.

You wonder why I'm forced to guess that you're talking about woo-ish things when you hold the simple idea that you essentially think these people may have "peeped" close to your chest as if it's precious secret, or a necessary "exercise for the reader" to figure out that that's what you have in mind?

My position, all along, has been, we don't know enough. First post #32 brought up the supernatural and then your first post in response to me, post #34, started right in with: mysterious invisible floating entities. You brought up woo-ish things in your first post, while I was making a very simple point about a logical position. No one forced you to bring up woo-ish things. You brought them up immediately.

The reason I wouldn't guess that that's what you have in mind is because if that's what you have in mind, your objections to the dream explanation make even less sense.

No, it actually doesn't. Based on the article, Dr Nelson's hypothesis maintains that NDEs are dreams. Based on my reading, that is not sufficient. The ability to accurately describe what happened while comatose and near-death is part of many NDEs and it's not explained by dreaming.

So what's left that isn't explained by a dream-like state? The witnesses' adamant insistence that their experiences were "more than dreams"? The common features of NDEs that many different people experience?

It should be obvious that there are many interesting things left to research and explain about NDEs.