DrmDoc

Nightmares may appear more intense because they are created by and envelope the same mental environment that creates and envelopes your consciousness within that experience. Conscious experiences are dissimilar in that your conscious environment also envelopes your physical/material perception of true reality, which can dilute your conscious mental focus and emotional experiences. Nightmares and NDEs are alike in that they are transitory unconscious mental experiences, not reality. Reality--that which has a real physical/material impact on our survival--should be our focus above any experience without substantive consequences such as NDEs. Your concerns about NDEs will likely not abate with any answers provided other than those obtained through a face-to-face focused discussion with a specialist familiar your type of concerns or obsession. I strongly suggest that you consider seeking such a specialist should your concerns remain unabated. I hope this helps.

It's clear that you may have deeper concerns that cannot be adequately addressed through open forums like this or with anyone other than a specialist, where you live, with whom you can discuss your concerns face-to-face. Obsessions can be most debilitating and, perhaps, it would be wiser to consultant with someone in your area regarding your experiences. I hope this helps.

Depression can be a powerfully overwhelming experience for many people regardless of onset cause or circumstance and it seems that you are quite vexed by the possibility of such an overwhelming experience in your final moments. That fear is a product of perhaps the most powerful and compelling force of living beings, which is our instinct to survive. For many of us, any consideration of our demise is met with an overwhelming fear of what we might experience in that moment. That fear is a powerful deterrent--and rightly so--to any endeavor we might pursue that might hasten our early arrival to that event. NDEs appear to recount the experiences of those who met that event and survived. Their survival is telling of how transient that experience may be regardless of its content and intensity. Having never experienced an NDE, I can't confidently say how intense that experience will be. What I can say is that it isn't an experience I would willful attempt. I can also say that it is not one we should contemplate with any serious concern if it is not our interest to meet our end sooner rather than later. If there is one thought we should take from all the NDE accounts we may have heard or read is that the people who have had NDEs also survived to give us their stories, which is a testament to their mental resiliency amid a certainly traumatic experience.

What is this "Secrete Science" of which you speak? It's my understanding that Religion is rooted in faith, which is the antithesis of science. Oh, I see...never mine. Good luck with your campaign and good luck Britain.

Here you provided "personal safety" as your reason for gun ownership: After you designated "personal safety" here, as what seemed a prime factor in your reason for ownership, you subsequently commented: Which clearly suggested to me that you didn't consider the designed factor of "personal safety" "necessarily all that important." ​Perhaps; however, you did provide "personal safety" as your reason for owning a shotgun as the above quotes provide. Not to be argumentative, but you have also stated the opposite as referenced above. Perhaps, but... ...from a discussion of personal safety as a prime factor to you designating how you might select your petrol station as a prime factor is indeed the comparison you seem to be making above--between factors of safety and a comely girl. Although I have referenced seeming inconsistencies, insinuating the measure of your veracity was not and is not my intent. However, as I have commented, gun ownership regards a measure of confidence and security that owners would otherwise not have without them.

Pardon, I thought I was addressing zapatos. I didn't know it was you I also misunderstood. So...personal safety means very little you as well?

After another review of the referenced article, I think its claims are extremely premature. The article proposes that larger brains have weaker connections between distant neuronal groups and, therefore, are more susceptible to disconnection syndrome, an effect of Alzheimer and schizophrenia. The article appears to presuppose smaller brains preclude Alzheimer and schizophrenia. Disconnection syndrome is diagnosed as an effect rather than a cause of those conditions. Researchers will have to first establish that smaller brains are not subject to the causes of Alzheimer and schizophrenia in larger brains before suggesting they are not susceptible to the effects arising from those illnesses. If smaller brains are not subject to afflictions of larger brains, size is an insufficient explanation for that variance--in my opinion.

You certainly have a way of drawing comparisons between clearly disproportionate circumstances. We both know that a pursuit for "personal safety" isn't comparable to a pursuit inspired by a "cute girl working at the counter"--that is unless your personal safety is truly as unimportant to you as lusting after a pretty girl. Perhaps I misunderstood what you have clearly expressed; for you, personal safety isn't "necessarily all that important" and is as concerning to you as how you might chose your petrol station or whether your pantry is sufficiently stock with emergency supplies. It just seems to me that if personal safety was truly your basis for gun ownership as you said, you would most certainly feel a little less personally safe without it.

Isn't that answer a bit disingenuous? If, as you have commented, "personal safety" is a prime factor for your ownership, then the measure should reasonably suggest the opposite of your answer here. Your answer here suggests that you, perhaps, wouldn't protest our government's removal of your right to keep your shotgun, which is something I think highly unlikely given your current responses.

If having jumper cables is a matter of "personal safety" as you previously commented relative to your gun ownership, then they are indeed a product of fear. As I commented, being prepared is an effort to secure oneself against a fear of vulnerability or weakness during some future moment of urgency or need. An effort to secure one's "personal safety" regards a fear of vulnerability that your gun ownership addresses. Can you answer honestly that you would feel equally confidence and secure, as you do now, without your shotgun?

So, the reason you own a shotgun is because you feel confident and secure? Or, is owning a shotgun the source of that confidence and security?

I think we can take this further. Let's take guns out of the equation and consider why anyone might seek preparedness for whatever reason. In every case, that reason is to secure oneself against a perceived vulnerability. Seeking security against a vulnerability is in every regards an effort to assuage a fear​--a fear of weakness amid some future moment of urgency or need. Preparedness isn't sought out of an abundance of security and confidence about one's future, it is sought out of an insecurity arising from a fear of vulnerability during some future circumstance or encounter. It's a simple equation, if a = b and b = c, then a = c.

Is it your honest opinion that fear isn't the basis for most gun sales in America?

I think what SJ is saying is that it seems no one buys a gun in America because he feels secure. I agree; if not for hunting or sport, what other reason could there be? As a child of the South, I was raised around guns and understand the allure. As an urban adult living in the North, I understand the insecurity motivating ownership but I chose not--In a way, I would feel less safe in my home with a gun than without.

Nightmares are different from a brain struggling to survive. They are products of the metabolic needs of the brain likely arising from resource exhaustion and toxic cellular waste build-up induced by chronic stress. When nightmares occur, the brain is trying to restore and maintain its resources rather than preserve its diminishing functions. Nightmares are products of the unconscious mind and, therefore, are not overtly reflective of what an individual believes his conscious experiences are. Comparing nightmares to NDE is like comparing apples and oranges, they are separate and distinct with equally separate and distinct neurological roots.

An interesting article. One might ask why wouldn't there be denser connectivity between closer rather than distant proximity neuronal groups considering the likely contiguous nature of our CNS evolution? Isn't it likely that subsequent neural groups are evolved from and more dependent on immediately prior groups rather than groups immediately prior to those? It seems highly probable that a recently evolved neural group is likely to have more connections with the next nearest evolved group than with a group more distantly evolved. What this study suggests to me is how recently evolved neural groups are more functionally dependent on nearest evolved groups than on those earlier in our brain's evolution.

Mmmm, bacon!

If you have time to voice that much of your thoughts, you have time to type those thoughts. Your voice typing has left much of what you're trying to convey here unintelligible. What I'm able to understand from your comments isn't clearly supported by what you've provided or the neuroscience training you profess. If you have some verified, peer-reviewed evidence in neuroscience to support your claims, please provide it here--I'm very interested in seeing it. NOTE: I now see you have provided a link. I'll have a look. This paper, Near-Death Experience, Consciousness, and the Brain, appear to be the only substantive document relevant to your claims. I think the following quote speaks volumes for the content of this paper: "It is still an unproven assumption that consciousness and memories emerge from brain function, because until now there is no scientific evidence for neural correlates of all aspects of subjective experience. Direct evidence of how neurons or neuronal networks could possibly produce the subjective essence of the mind and thoughts is currently lacking. And how should “unconscious” matter like our brain produce consciousness, although the brain only is composed of atoms, molecules, and cells with a lot of chemical and electrical processes?" To be fair, this paper was published in 2006, not in a scientific journal, and its author was a cardiologist, not a neuroscientist. There is more than sufficient recent evidence contrary to what the author has conveyed. You should, perhaps, consider researching more of this recent neurological evidence rather than rely on dated material to shape your thoughts. There just isn't enough reliable evidence for afterlife claims, which suggests our focus should regard life and living and the here and now rather than the after.

If the void and hellish imagery is as you described, they suggest a compelling reason for exiting the NDE state. If the individual believed he was experiencing the throws of death, then those hellish perceptions may have been produced as a motivation to survive that experience. One primary motivation for staying alive is our fear of what may come with or after death. Therefore, it seems to me that this type of distressing NDE wasn't about revisiting a prior depressive state but rather about the consequences of remaining within that state. Again, as I perceive, this is about the survival instinct inherent in brain function and the mental mechanisms it may use to promote survival.

Have you evaluated the details of those distressing NDEs? What, precisely, was the content of those experiences? Were those experiences of hopelessness associated with a life review? Without further details, how are we to know that this hopelessness wasn't connected to some survival yearning left unresolved? Hopelessness within one's state of dying doesn't necessarily translate as a re-experience of some negative period in one's life. I'm not aware of any study connecting NDEs specifically to temporal activations. The human brain experiences a burst of activity in all areas amid the dying process. Before you set your mind to what negative NDEs may encompass, look at the details of those experiences and evaluate whether they truly align with a review of negative life experiences.

Distressing NDEs are likely a result of the mindset of the individual and the circumstances rendering his or her NDE state. In one report of a hellish NDE that I recall, the individual experienced cardiac arrest as a result of a drug overdose. The person was a drug addict who was plagued by many metaphorical demons. Conceivably, this addict's NDE motivated his desire to live using the consequences of a hellish afterlife experience. Whether hellish or heavenly, the dying brain's aim is to stimulate continued survival in my opinion. If you were to experience a NDE, it's likely your brain will use either your hellish fears or heavenly yearnings as survival motivations. Depression isn't a survival motivator and seems contrary to the survival initiative of brain function amid death. This isn't about the conscious intent of an individual amid a dying state but rather the metabolic and physiological imperatives of a dying brain's struggle to survive. NDEs, I believe, are the psychological effects of a dying brain's survival imperatives. Recalling negative life experiences would be counterproductive to the imperatives of a dying brain unless they represent the strong motivation of addressing some issue left unresolved.

Fear; it's an instinctive response we should all understand when confronted by a person likely perceived as an abusive oppressor in the way she was likely perceived or profiled as violent.

I think NDEs and nightmares are differentiated by what is likely happening in the brain when each occurs. During near-death experiences, the brain is struggling against the physiological affects of dying; whereas, nightmares involves the metabolic processes of sleep related to the affects of stress. In each case, our perceptions during these experiences are likely how our brain interprets the metabolic and physiological processes involving those experiences. During NDE events, I believe the brain will supply whatever perceptual experience is necessary to sustain its continued function during the process of dying. Therefore, the brain will likely supply perceptual experiences that motivate continued survival, such as favorable memories of prior experiences in one's life or imagery suggesting a continuation into some afterlife--this is not to say that fear isn't a motivation our brain might employ. One more thing, our brain releases a flood of endorphins during the process of dying, which suggests the unlikely event of negative perceptual experiences during this process. However, this is not a suggestion that the process of dying is simple or without severe psychological consequences.

That supervisor must have been negligently biased or totally blind, which legitimizes our need for civilian oversight of police investigations.

I agree. It's an unnerving thought that people who think this way could be patrolling our streets with an expectation that they will treat all our citizens fairly and keep them equally safe. How can we change this culture of bigotry and violence in our nation? Words are not enough and deeds seem to engender even more hate and violence. Perhaps there are solutions but none, I think, that suits the urgency we seem to be experiencing more frequently.