Dr Long has the largest database of 1600 NDEs, and he claims that all of the OBEs he has tested yield 97.5% accuracy. One example is a man who had cardiac arrest, was able to see a nurse clean his mouth with specifically a pink cloth, he was able to identify which doctor out of 3 was shining a light in his eyes, and he saw a nervous looking woman staring from behind curtains at the procedure. He was able to identify the woman was blonde, and that was all true. Dr. Long also states that only 1 in 1000 report any awareness during anesthesia. How then, did he have 20 out of 200 cases where people under anesthesia were able to have OBEs? Dr. Penny Sartori, another researcher and medical doctor, says that she has had cases of hallucinations which are fragmented, and they are confusing, while NDErs and OBErs have clearer than normal perceptions and visions. According to Dr. Long, 76% of experiencers claimed that they had more vivid visions than real life. 
How could people make so many of these accurate out of body claims at a time that their brain flat lined, which by the way, according to neurosciences, is proof the brain can no longer create clear imagery to people who have little to no brain activity? Do you think these claims prove there is afterlife?

an interesting quote by Dr. Long during an interview about a debate he had with another doctor who claimed people can have these experiences under anesthesia: As an overview, let me say that these anesthetic-awareness experiences are so very, very rare that I hope this never dissuades anybody from having medically appropriate general anesthesia. Please don’t let any of the discussion here be an issue in preventing appropriate medical care.
As I say in the book, and this is a direct quote, “Rather than the type of coherent NDEs you read here, anesthetic-awareness results in a totally different experience.” And I provide a number of references on that, by the way, for interested listeners.
I go on to say, “Those who experience anesthetic-awareness often report very unpleasant, painful and frightening experiences. Unlike NDEs which are predominately visual experiences, this partial awakening during anesthesia more often involves brief and fragmented experiences that may involve hearing but usually not vision.” Again, I emphasize that anesthetic-awareness is very rare under anesthesia.
By the way, I’m not aware of any near-death experiences that occurred under general anesthesia on the NDERF website that described the typical content of anesthetic-awareness experiences. Dr. Woerlee brings up a few anecdotal discussions about anesthetic-awareness but I have a number of references. These are the scholarly people that have actually studied a number of anesthetic-awareness experiences and published them in peer-reviewed journals in the past. That’s my source of that.
As all of your listeners can easily see, you just don’t have near-death experiences that are predominately hearing but no vision. You don’t essentially ever have near-death experiences that involve brief, fragmented experiences that are painful or frightening. In fact, none of the general anesthesia near-death experiences that I reviewed had any of those components of them. Really, there’s no doubt about that.
These are completely different experiences. That being anesthetic-awareness and near-death experiences. I don’t think Dr. Woerlee quite got that point how clear that was; how crystal clear the distinction between those two types of experiences is.

What do you think of this?

I think Jeffrey Long is just one of all too many people who can't see the forest for the NDEs.

Boru

No amount of evidence, however carefully controlled or well-documented, will convince skeptics that NDE's pose a challenge to their unproven metaphysical assumption of physical causal closure.

(April 26, 2017 at 7:31 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: No amount of evidence, however carefully controlled or well-documented, will convince skeptics that NDE's pose a challenge to their unproven metaphysical assumption of physical causal closure.

Or to be more accurate, no amount of your bullshit will prove your bullshit to be anything other than bullshit.

(April 26, 2017 at 7:31 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: No amount of evidence, however carefully controlled or well-documented, will convince skeptics that NDE's pose a challenge to their unproven metaphysical assumption of physical causal closure.

But the trouble is, there is no evidence supporting the metaphysical contention that NDEs have anything other than a physical cause.

Boru

NDE proves NDE not the absurd idea your mind is separate from you body

What do I think of it all? Well, the concept itself is of course highly interesting, but then this bit;

(April 26, 2017 at 7:24 pm)Manga Wrote: he claims

kind of stick in my craw. Anyone can claim anything about anything. Show me an actual peer-reviewed compendium of work that unravels this bit by bit, and then you'll go a long way to convincing me.

TL;DR - he's trying to sell a book. Not worth my time.

I don't see NDEs as any kind of evidence even if they are real. You are not dead during an NDE, your brain is just starting to shut down. Whose to say that this "NDE" isn't just a massive burst of brain chemicals, perhaps the brain just fighting to stay alive as a last-ditch effort?