How science and spirituality intersect one of the most important things we will each face
Story at a Glance
Scott Adams, who recently passed from an aggressive, rapidly progressing prostate cancer, openly shared his final journey with a wide audience. Though his protracted suffering disturbed many, he approached the process in a wise and mature manner, offering valuable insights for others facing the dying experience.
Over centuries, the medical industry has increasingly monopolized death and dying, fostering a cultural view that treats death as something to fear, deny, and exclude from life—rather than a natural companion to accept.
This distortion makes dying far more arduous in our society, fueling an escalating medicalization of death in which expensive, often futile interventions are imposed on patients—frequently against their deepest values and wishes.
In contrast to the materialist scientific view that consciousness emerges solely from brain activity, compelling evidence indicates consciousness can persist independently of the brain and, in some cases, even transfer between individuals or contexts (e.g., via organ transplants or near-death accounts).
Recognizing the spiritual dimensions of dying—and how they intersect with modern medical discoveries—is vital for supporting a healthier, more meaningful transition. Many ancient and enduring traditions regard this moment as one of the most significant in human life.
This article explores practical strategies for facilitating an optimal dying process, drawing on shared wisdom from diverse historical and spiritual traditions while examining their alignment with contemporary medical sources.
Prior to the COVID-19 vaccines being released, many concerns were raised about these experimental gene therapies, including their potential for causing infertility, autoimmune diseases, and cancer (e.g., many of the theoretical autoimmune issues were summarized in this article Stefanie Seneff wrote shortly after the vaccines hit the market).
So, when Pfizer’s regulatory submission to Europe’s FDA (the EMA) was leaked on December 9, 2020, I read through it in detail and discovered that Pfizer simply had been allowed to exempt itself from testing the vaccine for these three key issues (despite that testing being required for gene therapies). Given that, I assumed that they had been tested for, major issues were found, and that Pfizer concluded their best option was to simply claim plausible deniability by insisting they “didn’t know” their vaccines would do all of that (because they’d “never” tested for them).
Note: the EMA publication also presciently highlighted other key issues with the vaccine such as regulators expecting it might not work in the field (due to the virus rapidly mutating), that the vaccine’s mRNA rapidly degraded, and that the lipid nanoparticles were chosen for efficacy rather than safety.
Regrettably, due to the religious fervor surrounding the vaccine (e.g., that it would rescue us from the lockdowns and return everything to normal), my arguments to wait on the vaccine largely fell on deaf ears with my colleagues and instead, excuse after excuse was made to dismiss the highly unusual and severe complications our patients kept developing immediately after vaccination (e.g., “there’s no evidence for this”).
Before long, people I knew around the country began contacting me with severe complications following the vaccination (e.g., dying suddenly or an elderly relative rapidly progressing into dementia) to ask if it could be linked to the vaccine. Hating that there was nothing at all I could do to stop this (I felt like an ant in front of a tsunami), I then decided I needed to document all of them so that I’d at least have some type of “evidence” I could show my skeptical colleagues (as I knew the medical journals would never allow vaccine injury datasets to be published).
In the process of doing that, I came across numerous cases of cancers rapidly developing (or dormant ones that had been in remission for years coming back) immediately following COVID vaccination, including numerous unusual cases which strongly argued the two were linked (e.g., a benign lump that had been stable for over a decade suddenly growing at a rapid rate after vaccination and being diagnosed as an extremely rare cancer they had no risk factors for which had metastasized throughout the body). Before long, more and more people noticed similar things, and the notion of COVID-19 “turbo cancers” entered the cultural lexicon. Since that time, the medical orthodoxy has denied this is an issue, but more and more datasets are emerging showing it is—which is particularly unfortunate, as beyond rapidly progressing, “turbo cancers” tend to be much less responsive to cancer treatments.
All of that briefly, is why I believe the medical field has irreversibly damaged the credibility it worked for decades to earn with the public.