(February 2, 2017 at 1:56 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:(February 2, 2017 at 1:43 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: Your response doesn't even address what he said. He said that a person isn't declared clinically dead until after resuscitation efforts have been stopped. Lazarus syndrome has absolutely nothing to do with what he said. "At no time before the resuscitation is the person declared dead." What on earth does what you posted have to do with what he said?
*emphasis mine*
Exactly!
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2121643/
Quote:The Lazarus phenomenon is described as delayed return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) after cessation of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR).
It states clearly that the phenomena occurs AFTER the CESSATION of CPR, which contradicts the OP's claim of NDE subjects:
(January 21, 2017 at 11:22 am)chimp3 Wrote: The subject is always declared clinically dead and yet is receiving resuscitation.*emphasis mine*
This is clearly NOT ALWAYS the case.
You're misreading what he's saying.
(January 21, 2017 at 11:22 am)chimp3 Wrote: This phrase always amuses me when reading accounts of "near death experiences". The subject is always declared clinically dead and yet is receiving resuscitation. That is not what happens. During a CPR/ defibrillation procedure a series of rescue breathing/ chest compressions , checking the heart rhythm to see if defibrillation is needed, and drugs are given. This can go on for quite awhile. Then when the Doctor says "Stop!" that's it. The time is noted and now the patient is declared dead. The death certificate for example will note "Time of death 14:22" . At no time before the resuscitation is the person declared dead. If you don't believe it , get a degree in medicine or nursing and see for yourself.
Clearly when he says "always" he is using hyperbole, not a literal assertion that every NDE account contains those elements. Simply that a lot of them do. He's describing his impression of the NDE accounts that he has read. Besides, how would you know what is in the accounts of NDEs which he's read? No, you're guilty of giving an uncharitable reading of chimp3 just so that you can say, "Nuh Uh." What you have posted doesn't address the substance of what he wrote.