'Third State' Exists Between Life and Death

Between Life And Death, A 'Third State' Exists,  Alive In The Unexpected State Of Being, Scientists Say

A growing number of new studies have found that, at least for some cells, death isn’t the end, but the beginning of something wholly unexpected. Certain human cells can survive and function for hours or even days after death, with white blood cells persisting for up to 86 hours post-mortem. The biological process of human life is simple, we're born, we live and one day we die. But at the cellular level, this apparently simple course is far more complicated. Every human body is a highly complex ecosystem made up of approximately 30 trillion human cells and an equally staggering number of microbes, all functioning together in concert to maintain what we recognize as life. But when you examine existence at the cellular level, things get a bit more interesting. You, me, and all of the 108 billion or so Homo sapiens who’ve ever walked the Earth have all been our own constellation of some 30 trillion cells. Each of our bodies is a collective organism of living human cells and microbes working in cooperation to create what our minds view as “life.” However, a growing number of new studies have found that, at least for some cells, death isn’t the end. Instead, it’s possibly the beginning of something new and wholly unexpected.

As researchers discover the cryptic "third state" of life, the question is one of enormity, may near-death experiences have something to do with it? If cells are able to continue and reorganize after an organism has died, could human consciousness do the same in ways we're not yet aware of? Survivors of near-death experiences report vivid dreams, a tunnel vision of light, or a feeling of calm. But what happens to those who don't come back? May their cells be undergoing a change, a try to reorganize in some fashion we haven't yet understood? This brings into question the nature of death, of consciousness, and beyond. A growing snowball of research concerning a new class of AI-designed multicellular organisms known as “xenobots” is gaining scientific attention for their apparent autonomy. In September 2024, Peter Noble, Ph.D., a microbiologist from the University of Alabama at Birmingham, along with Alex Pozhitkov, Ph.D., a bioinformatics researcher at the City of Hope cancer centre, did this research.

New studies indicate that for certain cells, death is not the final act but a precursor to something surprising. This ground breaking idea, the so-called "third state", hypothesizes that under certain circumstances, certain cells, even after the death of an organism, may reorganize and form new functions, throwing our basic definitions of life and death into doubt. Xenobots are cells that form new roles beyond their original biological function, for example, using hair like cilia for locomotion rather than transporting mucus. Because they appear to reassemble into this new form and function, the authors argue that xenobots form a kind of “third state” of life, wherein cells can reorganize after the death of an organism to form something new. These forms likely wouldn’t materialize in nature, but xenobots show that cells have a surprising ability to adapt to changes in their environment. Experiments with human cells, or “anthrobots,” exhibit this behavior, too. Taken together, these findings … challenge the idea that cells and organisms can evolve only in predetermined ways,” the authors says. “The third state suggests that [an organism’s] death may play a significant role in how life transforms over time.”

The concept of a third state initially gained scientific momentum with the emergence of xenobots, AI-created multicellular creatures that exhibit autonomy outside their initial biological purpose. These small biological robots are constructed from frog embryo cells, which, when introduced into new environments, spontaneously reconfigure and assume new functions. For instance, instead of employing their hair-like cilia to move mucus as they would in a living frog, xenobots redirect these structures for mobility. The implications for these cellular robots, or biobots, are pretty big, imagine tailor-made medicines crafted from your own tissues to avoid a dangerous immune response. But they also form a complicated picture of what a cell actually is. At least, that’s what evolutionary biologist and physician William Miller thinks. He’s the co-author of the 2023 book The Sentient Cell, which explores ideas found in the Cellular Basis of Consciousness (CBC) theory suggesting that cells retain a kind of consciousness. Miller believes that xenobots are just another example of how we don’t give credit to the inherent cognitive, or even conscious, abilities of the cells which make up our bodies.

At the centre of this controversy stands a challenging query: are cells conscious? Physician and evolutionary biologist William Miller takes on this theory in his work The Sentient Cell, an argument that puts forth the hypothesis that cells enjoy a type of cognitive capacity. The Cellular Basis of Consciousness (CBC) hypothesis proposes that cells do not blindly obey instructions from their genetics but rather are shown to implement decision-making activity, flexibility, and self-conserve mechanisms, all of which are akin to a primitive mode of consciousness. This phenomenon proves that cells are capable of being reassembled into new shapes and functions even after the death of an organism. Researchers opine that this postmortem cellular plasticity is not exclusive to xenobots. Human cells, or "anthrobots," also display such actions, proving the ability for posthumous cellular reorganization and transformation. “The organism as a whole no longer responds as it had, but subsets of cells are active, decision-making, and problem-solving,” Miller says. “So this fundamentally reconstitutes how we see the living frame … the fundamental unit of biological agency is the conscious cell.” Consciousness is a notoriously slippery term, and one whose definition can change based on fields of a study, context, or even across time. Famously, the 17th century philosopher, mathematician, scientist, and all-around smart guy René Descartes thought only the human mind was conscious (which led to some inhumane experiments). Thankfully, today science recognizes various types of consciousness throughout the animal kingdom, but when it comes to forms of life fundamentally unlike us, human biases of what can be conscious or intelligent slowly creep in.

While classical biological models portray genes as the ultimate controllers, Miller suggests that genes behave more as tools than controllers. Cellular intelligence is instead the driver of cooperation, mutual support, and problem-solving, underpinning multicellular life. This transforms the classical survival of the fittest paradigm to one of survival through collaboration and adaptability. “We, as humans, have very limited capacity and finely honed ability to see intelligence in medium-sized objects moving at medium speeds through three-dimensional space,” says Tufts University developmental and synthetic biologist Michael Levin, Ph.D. His lab constructed xenobots, and he says human beings are bad at recognizing intelligence when it’s “extremely small or extremely large.” Putting the intelligent cell at the centre of biology “spills out an entirely new biological narrative where genes are not controlling, genes are tools. In which we understand why organisms choose to stick together in their trillions, to solve problems, [for] decision-making, mutual support, partnerships, synergies, co-dependencies, collaboration, it’s not survival of the fittest,” Miller says. "For Miller, the concept of a sentient cell is a fundamental sea change in biology that challenges some Neo-Darwinian ideas like “survival of the fittest.” Because cells must work in concert to be successful, a more accurate microbial catchphrase might be “I serve myself best by serving others,” Miller says.

Historically, death has been defined as irreversible loss of organismal biological activity. Yet such medical procedures as organ donation illustrate that some organs, tissues and cells maintain their functional properties even after death, sometimes for hours, days, or weeks under optimal circumstances. Many scientists aren’t sold on this brave new future for biology. A 2024 Report describes CBC theory as “merely an intellectual exercise without empirical evidence” and the authors remain equally skeptical of consciousness claims regarding xenobots or other “third state” organisms." “It’s been known for maybe 75 years or more that cells can be induced to develop abnormally when taken out of context and cultured in vitro. This is nothing new,” University of California, Santa Cruz plant biologist Lincoln Taiz, Ph.D. and co-author, said. “When an insect herbivore secretes hormones into plant leaves, causing the leaves to form galls [abnormal growths] that serve as houses for the insect, is that a ‘third state’ of life?” Taiz has also tackled what he describes as “myths” surrounding plant consciousness and co-authored a review in 2019 titled “Plants Neither Possess nor Require Consciousness.”

A number of factors will decide whether cells survive after death. Environmental parameters, the state of metabolism, and methods of preservation are all important. Human white blood cells, for instance, can last between 60 and 86 hours from the time of death, while those of mice skeletal muscle can regenerate two weeks after death. Some fibroblast cells in sheep and goats have even been grown up to a month following the organism's death. For Wendy Ann Peer, Ph.D., a biologist at the University of Maryland, the idea of cellular consciousness simply lacks the scientific rigor necessary to be considered a theory. “With the scientific method, there has to be a control and a hypothesis that’s clearly tested,” Peer says. “And the key for your hypothesis is that it has to be falsifiable.” While some experts say cells are more than just automatons following strict genetic orders, scientists still overwhelmingly define consciousness as pertaining to something with a nervous system and a brain capable of yielding a subjective point of view. However, despite this disagreement, both groups agree on at least one important point, understanding cells and exploring their many capabilities is a huge opportunity. Taiz compares the potential use of anthrobots in medicine to humans behaving as their own “gall-forming insects in plants,” via altering the development of stem cells to create particular cell behaviours." 

In addition, researchers have discovered that certain human lung cells are capable of self-assembling into small multicellular structures which can move and heal themselves. These "anthrobots" exhibit a capacity to explore their environment and repair injured neurons, abilities which contradict traditional assumptions about cellular behaviour following death. "When cells are taken out of context and are no longer exchanging information or signals from nearby cells, different genes can be expressed than what’s normal, Peer says. Simply put, the xenobots are an advanced version of “animal caps,” a well-known technique in developmental biology in which cells retain the ability to differentiate into other cells. Cells' survival following the death of an organism relies on a number of biochemical processes. Some researchers believe that cell membrane specialized channels and pumps act as complex electrical circuits which coordinate cellular communication, organization and movement. Stress- and immune-related genes also have heightened activity after death, and this implies that cells are striving to make up for lost homeostasis. Age, health, trauma, infection and type of species affect the duration of time cells will survive after death. For instance, islet cells in the pancreas, which secrete insulin, are notoriously hard to transplant because of their high demand for energy and susceptibility to attack by the immune system. Uncovering how certain cells resist the process of decay could transform organ transplantation and regenerative medicine. "Meanwhile, Miller agrees. “Levin’s work is a good example of trying to discern how to partner with cells to create living forms to help humans,” he says. “We’re learning to do what cells do, and we’re going to partner with them if we’re smart.”

The third state has very significant implications for biotechnology and medicine. Among its possible uses are in personalized medicine, where drugs might be delivered using anthrrobots made from the patient's own cells, to repair tissues or fight diseases. For example, engineered anthrobots could be programmed to dissolve arterial plaque in atherosclerosis patients or clear excess mucus in cystic fibrosis patients. Unlike synthetic drugs, these living cellular machines would not trigger immune rejection and could biodegrade naturally within weeks, minimizing long-term risks. The applications of this study go far beyond the realm of medicine; they border on philosophical and ethical considerations regarding consciousness, identity and the very nature of what it means to be alive. As science continues to peel away layers of cell behaviour, one thing remains for sure, life, as we have always known it, is much more complex and mysterious than we have ever conceived. In addition, the third state of matter idea might lead to next-generation regenerative therapies, potentially enabling researchers to revive lost functions in injured organs or even extend transplantable organ preservation times. The discovery of the mechanisms behind how some cells are able to survive and adapt following death might also yield essential knowledge on aging, neuro degeneration, and immunity. As study of the third state increases, it threatens our traditional notions of biology, consciousness, and the very nature of death. If cells are in some sense intelligent, as scientists argue, then life itself must be redefined. What we might view as the "end" is merely a stage of biological change, in which cells rearrange themselves and accommodate different functions in a manner previously unknown. Conscious or not, it looks like cells will undoubtedly play a starring role in the unfolding future of human health.

This study also opens up an interesting possibility: might near-death experiences have something to do with the third state? Researchers have long reported instances of people having vivid, life-changing experiences at the time of clinical death, seeing light, meeting dead relatives or feeling themselves float above their bodies. If cells are still able to function and reorganize after death, might this activity be responsible for these experiences, rather than just hallucinations?  The third stage between life and death is no longer an outlying theory, it is a phenomenon witnessed by scientists with far-reaching medical, ethical and philosophical consequences. While scientists continue to study how cells survive and change following the death of an organism, our perception of life itself may be poised on the verge of a paradigm shift. Some scientists now question whether such experiences are a cellular-level phenomenon even in individuals who cannot be resuscitated. If cells preserve some sort of consciousness or decision-making capacity after biological death, it would change our concept of both consciousness and the line between life and death.