SUPERPHOSPHATE OR
N-P-K FERTILIZERS
by Dr. Lawrence Wilson
©
June 2015, L.D.
Wilson Consultants, Inc.
All information in this
article is for educational purposes only.
It is not for the diagnosis, treatment, prescription or cure of any
disease or health condition.
Today, almost all crops are fertilized with what are called superphosphate fertilizers or N-P-K fertilization methods. This applies to organically grown food as well as conventionally raised produce, sadly. This method is so well-entrenched that it would be almost impossible to change it quickly. However, it is not ideal, by any means, and this article explains why.
THE
HISTORY OF SUPERPHOSPHATE FERTILIZATION
The use of superphosphates began around 1930 in the United States. Their discovery was somewhat of an accident, in that farmers had earlier observed that where the soil was naturally high in phosphates, which were and are a type of contaminant or pollutant, that certain crops grew very well.
There followed research to find out why, and soil scientists discovered that the combination of the right mineral compounds of nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium would indeed stimulate plant growth, producing a much larger plant that appeared to be quite robust, as well. This seemed wonderful for farmers who are paid for their crop by the pound. As a result, this method of fertilizing with superphosphate chemicals took hold and continues today.
N-P-K fertilization
literally changed the face of agriculture and ushered in the 20th
century chemical-based agriculture.
Soon to follow were other soil stimulants, hormone therapy for soils,
and pesticides to kill all the new crop diseases that arose. The total of all this is today called
the agricultural green revolution.
Today, this is all beginning to backfire, but that is another story. For now, let us understand exactly how the superphosphate chemicals work, and the effects upon the crops, the soil and human and animal species.
PROBLEMS
WITH SUPERPHOSPHATE OR N-P-K FERTILIZATION OF THE SOIL
1. More yin and thus more yin-toxic crops. This may sound esoteric, but it is an important truth. Larger species of wheat, soy, corn, fruits, and everything else today are more yin plants. The word yin in Chinese means expanded and centrifugal in nature. This is exactly what happens to these plants under the influence of N-P-K fertilizers. They grow big, tall and expanded.
The problem with this
is that the world today is very yin already. To maintain a balance, we do not need more yin crops. In fact, they make us more ill. Please read Yin
Disease and Yin And Yang Healing on
this website to learn why the world is so yin today, and how this damages
health.
2.
Depletion of the soil trace minerals.
This occurs for at least two reasons:
a)
The increased yield of acreage or tonnage of crops means that more trace
elements go into the crops, and these trace minerals are then removed from the
soil when the crop is harvested.
As a result, the soil needs to be replenished with more trace minerals. However, farmers have not done this, in
general, as it is very costly and in some cases, quite difficult to
accomplish.
b).
Superphosphates seem to speed up the oxidation rate of the plants, weeds, and
the soil microorganisms. This is a form
of stress
for the soil, the crops and the soil micro-organisms that leads to harmful
changes in the mineral composition of the soil, the crops and the soil
micro-organisms themselves.
This reason
for trace mineral depletion is so critical and important, it is discussed later
in this article in a separate section below.
c)
Other damage to the soil micro-organisms. This is often from pesticides, insecticides, the use of
other chemicals, and perhaps damage due to topsoil erosion or other causes.
3.
Topsoil erosion. Topsoil erosion may not sound serious, but they are. Topsoil takes hundreds of years to
form, and any loss of it is catastrophic for agriculture. The reasons for topsoil erosion include
reduced soil permeability discussed below, but also changes in the soil flora
or micro-organisms that may make the soil dryer and less able to hold together
during dust and rain storms. This
creates dust bowls when the wind blows, desertification and other horrors for
humanity.
4.
Reduced soil permeability. This means that rain water just runs
off, instead of being absorbed and held in the soil. When the water runs off, first it takes with it valuable
topsoil. Some, of course, is
deposited downstream, but much is just washed into the oceans where it benefits
no one except some fish.
Secondly, it
causes far worse flooding problems.
Thirdly,
reduced soil permeability can spell disaster for some crops that require a
permeable soil.
Fourth, impermeable or hard-pan soil is
much more difficult for farmers to till and cultivate. So this is another serious problem in
some areas.
Today,
farmers may add more chemicals to soften the soil and help it to hold more
water. However, adding more
chemicals is sometimes dangerous, as the chemicals can be toxic. Allowing animals to graze on the land
is another solution, and there are others that are non-toxic.
5. More flooding around the world. I list this problem mentioned above
separately, as it is so serious.
Many news stories document that flooding is a terrible human and environmental
problem today. Few news stories
relate it back to modern chemical agriculture, but that is one of its main
causes. Flooding is the result of
reduced soil permeability and loss of topsoil. When the rains come, the soil cannot absorb the water, so it
just forms a torrent and tears through homes and cities.
6.
Desertification around the world. I will list
this problem separately, as it, too, is so critical to stop. Desertification simply means that as
the soil loses fertility, fewer weeds and other plants, bushes and trees grow
in the area, and after a while the area turns to desert. This ruins it as an animal habitat, and
it cannot be used for farming, ranching, or most other human activities. This is still happening across Africa
and parts of Asia thanks to unwise farming practices. Fortunately, this problem is being addressed, more than the
others, as it is so serious.
7.
Insect and other pest infestations due to imbalanced plant chemistry. Insect infestations have always plagued
agriculture. Lately, some of these
problems are becoming worse. Once
again, this rarely makes the news because mankind is resourceful and often
finds solutions. However, the
solutions, as with human health problems, are usually more Òstimulant or
suppressive drugsÓ for the soil in the form of newer pesticides that themselves
are quite toxic and damaging.
8.
More severe poisoning of the soil, plants, animals, humans and the environment
with newer toxic pesticides and insecticides. The answer for the problems listed above, according to the
Òfactory farming movementÓ, has been to develop more and more new chemicals
such as, pesticides, insecticides, and more recently special
genetically-modified strains of seeds that contain pesticides such as Roundup
Ready Corn and others that can survive the reduced soil fertility, unbalanced
soil and increased pest problems.
This
movement has brought great profits to a few biotech companies such as Monsanto
and others who genetically design the seeds and then license the farmers to use
them. It is all quite despicable,
however, as it is not solving the basic problem and it is causing other
problems. These include
cross-contamination of seeds, more toxic soils, and the production of even less
nutritional crops.
The
chemicals themselves are also often costly, and quite harmful to the soil,
animals, wildlife and humans who must work around the chemicals and eat their
residues. These toxic chemicals
are much worse than some imagine, and they are contaminating the entire planet
more each year.
9.
Reduced general soil fertility. This effect is a combination of trace mineral imbalances,
reduced soil permeability, toxic soil due to pesticide use, and topsoil
erosion. This serious problem is slowly
reducing the wonderful crop yields that superphosphates used to produce. It may also threaten starvation for
millions of people in the future if certain trends are not reversed.
In some
parts of the world, reduced soil fertility is already causing starvation in areas
which used to support agriculture.
10.
Much poorer quality food. The
deterioration in the nutritional quality of our food has been
well-documented. In many cases,
the trace mineral content, which is just one measure, has declined by over
1000% in the past hundred years.
In some cases, it is even worse.
In addition
to mineral, vitamin and protein losses, the food is starchier, more sugary, and
loaded with chemicals, all of which promote disease in livestock, humans and
even the bees and other creatures that eat the food. This is a major contributor to the Òdiseases of
civilizationÓ that now ravage America, Europe and even parts of Asia, which is
quickly adopting the N-P-K mentality out of what they believe is sheer economic
necessity.
11.
More toxic metals in the soil. As is the
case with human beings, the soil takes up and utilizes many more toxic metals
when there is a shortage of vital trace minerals. This is a final problem that has repercussions throughout
the food chain, and at every level of agriculture and human nutrition. The food supply has not only become
depleted of certain trace minerals, but it has become more toxic with the heavy
metals, as well.
12. Accumulation of the ÒamigosÓ or the
irritants or oxides in the soil, and thus the food. This is an interesting problem that I
first noticed in human beings.
Since then, I have found the identical problem in livestock animals,
domesticated animal species, and in the soil.
The
amigos
refers to biounavailable or less bioavailable forms of certain minerals
including iron, manganese, aluminum, copper, nickel, boron, molybdenum,
chromium, selenium, vanadium, cobalt, lithium and others. Even calcium and magnesium can form
these less available compounds.
What
appears to occur is that as the soil or the plant and animal bodies become
weaker, certain forms of minerals start to accumulate. The soil micro-organisms and the bodies
can make these compounds. They
have a stimulating effect, so they compensate for certain weaknesses in the
soil, the plants, the animals and in human beings and in this way keep the soil
and living organisms balanced to a degree. However, they are not healthy at all. To learn more about them in human
beings, an in general, read The Amigos - Iron,
Manganese and Aluminum on this website.
THE
EFFECTS OF SUPERPHOSPHATES ON ANIMAL HUSBANDRY AND LIVESTOCK
This
has been touched upon, and much more could be written about it. In general, the health of the livestock
today is far worse than in the past.
The animals are stressed, infected with viri, and their digestion,
immune responses, reproduction, energy level and much more is out of balance
and weak. Also, their flesh and
milk contain pesticide residues, hormone residues and other toxic chemicals.
Many of the
livestock, especially dairy cows and beef cattle, are not nearly as healthful
today because they are genetic hybrids.
The hybrids can survive on the depleted and toxic feed, but they require
antibiotics, hormones, vaccines and other toxic drugs to survive. They are like many people today who are
so ill that some seem to need half a dozen drugs and several operations just to
survive.
THE
EFFECTS OF SUPERPHOSPHATES ON WILDLIFE
Wildlife
are often decimated by eating the crops in the fields produced with
superphosphates. This is because
the wildlife is not accustomed to the stimulation of poor quality, low
trace-element food and they suffer diseases and death as a result. The wildlife are also often poisoned by
the pesticide residues that find their way into the water supplies and the air
everywhere on planet earth. They
are also decimated by the drying up of their habitats as a result of the soilÕs
inability to absorb and hold as much water as it did previously. It is a total loss for the wildlife on
the planet with few exceptions.
THE
EFFECTS OF SUPERPHOSPHATES ON HUMAN BEINGS
The
green revolution of the twentieth century has seen a great increase in the
amount of food that can be grown per acre of arable land. This has certainly been a blessing for
life on earth.
However,
there has been a price to pay, and we are now reaping some of the adverse
effects of the green revolution.
The trace mineral content, protein content and other nutrients in the
food are much lower than 100 years ago.
While some diseases have been conquered, other diseases have taken their
place and the human lifespan has basically stagnated for the past 20 or 30
years. Commentators should mention
this fact when people defend the medical system as being so wonderful. It is not.
Imbalances
and deficiencies and toxicity related to our agricultural methods contribute to
all the major diseases of our day.
Fortunately as this website documents, much of the effects can be offset
or at least modified if a person will eat a diet of at least 70% cooked
vegetables. Also, the ravages of
malnutrition continue to plague the world, and some of this, though not all, is
due to the wholesale use of superphosphates without much understanding.
MORE
DETAILS ON THE OXIDATION RATE OF THE SOIL AND HOW SPEEDING UP THE OXIDATION
RATE WITH N-P-K FERTILIZERS UPSETS THE MINERAL BALANCE OF THE SOIL
The oxidation rate is a general term that
has to do with the metabolic rate or rate of oxygen burning or usage in a
plant, animal or human being.
The concept
of stress is used often in relation
to human health. However, soils
are often stressed as well. They
can be stressed by lack of moisture, by insect infestation, or by other factors.
Superphosphates exert a stress that speeds up the metabolic rate of all
life in the soil.
Interestingly,
this stress is very similar to how some of our food habits may speed up the
oxidation rate in human beings.
Here are some of the human equivalents of N-P-K fertilization:
(N or
Nitrogen). This can come from eating too
much meat, cheese, eggs, or even too many dried beans or legumes. Overeating on these foods, which is
standard in many Western peopleÕs diets, gives the body too much nitrogen
compounds, which are rich in protein foods.
(P or
phosphorus) This comes from drinking some
cola drinks or soda pop. Slightly
toxic phosphorus compounds are also rich in all grains. Some colas contain toxic forms of
phosphorus such as phosphoric acid.
The grains contain phytates and other phosphorus compounds, which can
also be easily overdone.
(K or
potassium) This comes, unfortunately,
from eating fruit today and perhaps some vegetables such as the nightshades,
which are actually fruits. All
of it, even organically grown fruit, generally contains a lot of this toxic
form of potassium. For some
reason, fruits pick up a lot of the toxic potassium found in the N-P-K
fertilizers used on the fruit trees.
Vegetables
do not pick up as much of it, so they are safer, especially if they are
cooked. This may be because
vegetables are much more yang in Chinese medical terms than fruits. Yang will not attract or pick up as
much of yin toxins, of which the potassium used in N-P-K fertilizers is one.
Most everyone, we
find, needs to be eating far more cooked vegetables, most likely to counteract
the stimulating or unbalanced effect of eating some other foods.
Eating many
cooked vegetables also contain ÒantidotesÓ for the stimulant foods, every day
also provides plenty of ÒantidotesÓ for some of the unbalancing effects of
other foods. These protective
chemicals include plenty of folic acid, TMGor trimethylglycine, many trace
elements such as calcium, magnesium, manganese, zinc, copper, boron, healthful
fiber, and other balancing nutrients.
Humans and
some animals try to speed up their metabolism with other stimulants, as well,
such as sugars, caffeine, alcohol, drugs, fear, worry and other methods. However, the food-based stimulants
above are actually among the main metabolic stimulants used by human beings
today around the world! It is
truly amazing that the same things that stimulate the soil and animal species
will also stimulate the human oxidation rate – and with the same harmful
consequences.
How
speeding up the oxidation rate affects mineral levels in the soil and in human
and animal species. Soil
stimulants, including N-P-K fertilizers, essentially cause a fight-or-flight
response in the soil micro-organisms.
The fertilizers act as somewhat yang
stressors that initiate this reaction.
According to
the stress theory of disease proposed by Dr. Hans Selye, MD, a fight-or-flight
reaction always causes the depletion of particular trace minerals, and an
overabundance of others. For
example, this particular type of stress depletes calcium, magnesium, and zinc
quickly and early. Later on, it
causes depletion of other trace minerals such as selenium, silicon, manganese,
boron and bioavailable forms of copper.
The
following is an article by Dr. Mercola from his email newsletter, July 1, 2013:
RUNNING
OUT OF SUPERPHOSPHATE FERTILIZERS
By Dr. Mercola
Environmental
pollution is a significant problem. But while most of the focus is placed on
polluting industries, toxins like mercury and small particle traffic pollution,
a major source of environmental devastation is caused by modern food
production. Far from being life sustaining, our modern chemical-dependent
farming methods:
¥
Strip
soil of nutrients
¥
Destroy
critical soil microbes
¥
Contribute
to desertification
and global climate change, and
¥
Saturate
farmlands with toxic pesticides, herbicides and fertilizers that then migrate
into ground water, rivers, lakes and oceans.
For example,
many areas of Minnesota, which is prime farmland, now face the problem of
having dangerously elevated levels of nitrogen
in their drinking water.
The
conversion of grasslands and pastures into chemical-driven, industrial crop
land has eliminated much of the natural filtering of ground water that such
native landscapes typically provide. Health risks of nitrogen include a potential
connection to cancer, as well as thyroid and reproductive problems in both
humans and livestock.
Looming
Fertilizer Shortage Could Spell the End of Modern Agriculture
Modern
fertilizer consists of varying amounts of nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P) and potassium
(K). These three are believed to be essential for plants to grow, (below, IÕll
discuss why NPK may not be as necessary as we think.), and are extracted from
the soil with each harvest.
This is why
farmers spread fertilizer on their fields, to replace the nutrients lost. ItÕs
certainly not the ideal and sustainable way to farm, but itÕs thought to be the
most efficient for large-scale farms. Strategies like crop rotation and
allowing large fields to rest would cut too deep into profits that are based on
quantity, opposed to quality.
Unfortunately,
the Earth's soil is now being depleted of nutrients at more than 13 percent the
rate it can be replaced. Not only that, but according to some, we may also be
facing looming shortages of two critical fertilizer ingredients: phosphorus and
potassium.
A 2012
article in Mother Jones1 discussed Òpeak phosphorus and potassium,Ó
drawing lines of similarity between the diminishing reserves of these natural
elements and Òpeak oil.Ó
Unlike
nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium cannot be synthesized, and our aggressive
large-scale farming methods, which deplete soils of nutrients that then must be
replaced, are quickly burning through available phosphorus and potassium
stores.
According to
well-known investor Jeremy Grantham, writing for Nature:
ÒThese two elements cannot be made, cannot
be substituted, are necessary to grow all life forms, and are mined and
depleted. ItÕs a scary set of statements. Former Soviet states and Canada have
more than 70 percent of the potash. Morocco has 85 percent of all high-grade
phosphates. It is the most important quasi-monopoly in economic history.
What happens when these fertilizers run out
is a question I canÕt get satisfactorily answered and, believe me, I have
tried. There seems to be only one conclusion: their use must be drastically
reduced in the next 20-40 years or we will begin to starve.Ó
This largely
unknown issue may end up playing a more significant role than you can currently
imagine, because it cuts to the heart of the sustainability of modern
agricultural practices, or rather the lack
thereof.
Ò[T]he next time someone facilely insists
that the 'industrial farms
are the future,' ask what the plan is regarding phosphorus,Ó Mother
Jones writes. ÒDeveloping an agriculture that's ready
for a phosphorus shortage means a massive focus on recycling the nutrients we
take from the soil back into the soil—in other words, composting, not on
a backyard level but rather on a society-wide scale.
It also requires policies that give farmers
incentives to build up organic matter in soil, so it holds in nutrients instead
of letting them leach away... Both of these solutions, of course, are specialties
of organic agriculture.Ó
Monoculture
vs. Polyculture
Monoculture
(or monocropping) is defined as the high-yield agricultural practice of growing
a single crop year after year on the same land, in the absence of rotation
through other crops. Corn, soybeans, wheat, and to some degree rice, are the
most common crops grown with monocropping techniques. In fact, corn, wheat and
rice now account for 60 percent of human caloric intake, according to the UN
Food and Agriculture Organization.2
By
contrast, polyculture
(the traditional rotation of crops and livestock) better serves both land and
people. Polyculture evolved to meet the complete nutritional needs of a local
community. Polyculture, when done mindfully, automatically replenishes what is
taken out, which makes it sustainable with minimal effort.
If itÕs true
that we may at some point face a shortage of phosphorus and potassium,
large-scale farming facilities would be hard-pressed to produce much of
anything after a short while. Such shortages might even lead to geopolitical
strife, as phosphate rock is primarily concentrated in the occupied territory
of the Western Sahara region of Morocco. It may sound farfetched to some, but
how far would a nation go to secure access to such a location if the future of
the entire agricultural industry and food supply depended on it?
Monocropping
Is NOT the Way to Feed a Growing Population
The evidence
tells us that forging more sustainable alternatives is imperative if we hope to
survive. Yet proponents of factory farms and genetically
engineered crops argue that monocropping, or crop specialization, is
the only way to feed the masses and that it's far more profitable than having
small independent farms in every township.
But is this
really true? A number of studies show just the opposite! In fact, studies are
showing that medium-sized organic farms
are far more profitable than ANY sized industrial agricultural operation.
For example,
researchers at the University of Wisconsin's College of Agriculture and Life
Sciences and Michael Fields Agricultural Institute3 (results published in 2008 in the Agronomy Journal)4 found that traditional organic farming
techniques of planting a variety of plants to ward off pests is more profitable
than monocropping. The organic systems resulted in higher profits than
"continuous corn, no-till corn and soybeans, and intensively managed alfalfa."
Not only
that, but organic farming practices use natural, time-tested techniques that
naturally prevents soil depletion and destruction, and doesnÕt use chemical
fertilizers and other agricultural chemicals that pollute our soil, air, and
waterways.
In the study
just mentioned, the researchers concluded that government policies supporting
monoculture are "outdated," and that it's time for support to be
shifted toward programs that promote crop rotation and organic farming. As it
turns out, when you eliminate the agricultural chemicals, specialized machinery
and multi-million dollar buildings, fuel costs, insurance costs, and the rest
of the steep financial requirements of a big industrial operation, your cost of
producing food takes a serious dive into the doable. And did I mentionÉ the
food from organic farms tend to be far more nutritious, besides being free of
toxic contaminants?
Even the US
Department of Agriculture (USDA) is starting to question our current path of
monoculture. It recently released a report titled: "Climate Change and
Agriculture in the United States."5 According to the report, our current agricultural system, which is
dominated by corn and soy, is unsustainable
in the long term. Should temperatures rise as predicted, the US could expect
to see significant declines in yields by the middle of this century. Food
shortages would be inevitable, since little besides these crops are grown.
(Keep in mind the primary crops grown in the US are used in processed food
production, so countless numbers of food products would be affected by massive
crop loss.)
Nitrogen
Overuse Threatens the Environment
Going back
to where we started, the overuse of nitrogen in farming is causing far more
environmental devastation than many currently comprehend. A recent National Geographic article6 addresses this issue:
Ò'Runaway nitrogen is suffocating wildlife
in lakes and estuaries, contaminating groundwater, and even warming the globeÕs
climate. As a hungry world looks ahead to billions more mouths needing nitrogen-rich
protein, how much clean water and air will survive our demand for fertile
fields?'
China, the worldÕs largest producer of
synthetic nitrogen, has hundreds of nitrogen factories, and the countryÕs
farmers apply vast amounts of nitrogen to their fields. One rice farmer reports
spreading no less than 530 pounds of urea, a dry form of nitrogen, on each
acre. Vegetable farmers use even more than that. According to the featured
article,7 some use upwards of two tons of nitrogen
each hectare (2.47 acres).
'Few of them think theyÕre doing anything
harmful. No, no pollution,' says Song, when asked about the environmental
effects of fertilizer,' the
article states. "Scientists tell a
different story. 'Nitrogen fertilizer is overused by 30 to 60 percent' in intensively
managed fields, says Xiaotang Ju, of the China Agricultural University in
Beijing. 'ItÕs misuse!' Once spread on fields, nitrogen compounds cascade
through the environment, altering our world, often in unwelcome ways. Some of
the nitrogen washes directly from fields into streams or escapes into the air.
Some is eaten, in the form of grain, by either humans or farm animals, but is
then released back into the environment as sewage or manure from the worldÕs
growing number of pig and chicken farms.Ó
Water
pollution, as mentioned earlier, is one of the side effects of such overuse. In
a matter of decades, rivers that used to run crystal clear though Chinese
provinces are now cloudy from overgrowth of phytoplankton, fed by fertilizer
runoff from the fields. According to National
Geographic:
ÒA recent national survey of 40 lakes in
China found that more than half of them suffered from too much nitrogen or
phosphorus. (Fertilizer containing phosphorus is often to blame for algal
growth in lakes.)
The best known case is Lake Tai, ChinaÕs
third largest freshwater lake, which regularly experiences huge blooms of toxic
cyanobacteria. A spreading bloom in 2007 contaminated water supplies for two
million people in the nearby city of Wuxi. Excess nutrients are damaging
fisheries in ChinaÕs coastal areas in the same way that fertilizer runoff
flowing down the Mississippi has destroyed fisheries in the Gulf of Mexico: by
creating dead zones in which algae and phytoplankton bloom, die, and decompose,
using up oxygen and suffocating fish.Ó
Finding the
Middle Ground of Good Harvests with Reduced Fertilizer Pollution
National Geographic describes a research project in Michigan
that has been ongoing for the past two decades. The project is part of Michigan
State UniversityÕs Kellogg Biological Station, near Kalamazoo. Here, fields
that are exactly one hectare in size provide side-by-side comparisons of four
different farming methods, ranging from conventional to organic. Everything
that is added to or removed from each field is carefully measured, including
rainfall, fertilizer, nitrous oxide, water that leaches into groundwater, and
the harvest itself. According to the article:
ÒEach field planted according to standard
plowing and fertilizer recommendations released 610 pounds of nitrogen per acre
into MichiganÕs shallow groundwater over the past 11 years... The organic
fields in RobertsonÕs experiment, which received no commercial fertilizer or
manure, lost only a third as much—but those fields also produced 20 percent
less grain.
Intriguingly, the 'low input' fields, which
received small amounts of fertilizer but were also planted with winter cover
crops, offered the best of both worlds: Average yields were about as high as
those from the conventional fields, but nitrogen leaching was much reduced,
almost to the level of the organic fields.
If AmericaÕs farmers could cut their
nitrogen losses to something close to this level... restored wetlands and
revived small streams could clean up the rest. As in China, though, many farmers
find it hard to change. When a familyÕs livelihood is at stake, it may seem
safer to apply too much fertilizer rather than too little. 'Being a good
steward currently has economic consequences that are unfair,' says Robertson.Ó
How
Sustainable Soil Science Can Help Rescue Our Environment and Food Supply
I recently
interviewed Dr. Elaine
Ingham,8 an
internationally recognized expert on the benefits of sustainable soil science.
I also recently visited her at her new position at the Rodale Institute in
Pennsylvania. According to Dr. Ingham, a key component of successful
agriculture lies in having the right helper organisms in the soil; beneficial
species of bacteria, fungi, protozoa, beneficial nematodes (not the
weedfeeders), microarthropods, and earthworms—all of which contribute to
plant growth in a number of different ways.
Nutrient
cycling is another major issue. According to Dr. Ingham, thereÕs no soil on
Earth that lacks the nutrients to grow a plant. She believes the concept that
your soil is deficient and needs added phosphorus or nitrogen etc in order to
grow plants is seriously flawed, and largely orchestrated by the chemical
companies, because itÕs based on looking at the soluble, inorganic nutrients
that are partly present in your soil.
The real nutrition your plants require is
actually derived from microorganisms in
the soil. These organisms take the mineral material thatÕs in your soil and
convert it into a plant-available form. Without these bioorganisms, your plants
cannot get the nutrients they need. So what you need is not more chemical soil
additives, what you need is the proper balance of beneficial soil organisms.
According to Dr. Ingham:
ÒItÕs very necessary to have these
organisms. They will supply your plant with precisely the right balances of all
the nutrients the plant requires. When you start to realize that one of the
major roles and functions of life in the soil is to provide nutrients to the
plants in the proper forms, then we donÕt need inorganic fertilizers. We
certainly donÕt have to have genetically engineered plants or to utilize
inorganic fertilizers if we get this proper biology back in the soil.
If we balance the proper biology, we select
against the growth of weeds, so the whole issue with herbicides is done away
with. We donÕt need the herbicides if we can get the proper life back into the
soil and select for the growth of the plants that we want to grow and against
the growth of the weedy species.Ó
Interestingly
enough, you can use a starter culture to boost the fermentation and generation
of beneficial bacteria much in the same way you can boost the probiotics in
your fermented
vegetables. For compost, this strategy is used if you want to
compost very rapidly. In that case, you can use a starter to inoculate the
specific sets of organisms that you need to encourage in that compost.
For optimal
physical health, you need plant foods to contain the full set of nutrients that
will allow the plant to grow in a healthy fashion, because thatÕs the proper
balance of nutrients for us human beings as well. Dr. Ingham has written several
books on this topic, including The Field
Guide for Actively Aerated Compost Tea, and The Compost Tea Brewing Manual.
How to Help
Support Sustainable Agriculture
If you want to
optimize your health, you simply must return to the basics of healthy food
choices and typically this includes buying your food from responsible,
high-quality, sustainable sources.
This is why I encourage you to support the small family farms
in your area. This includes not only visiting the farm directly, if you have
one nearby, but also taking part in farmer's markets and community-supported
agriculture programs.
Not only is
the food so much tastier and healthier when you get it from sustainable,
non-CAFO sources, but there is something about shopping for fresh foods in an
open-air, social environment that just feels
right. An artificially lit, dreary supermarket -- home to virtually every CAFO
food made -- just can't compete. If you want to experience some of these
benefits first-hand, here are some great resources to obtain
wholesome food that supports not only you but also the environment:
1.
Alternative Farming Systems
Information Center,
Community Supported Agriculture (CSA)
2.
Farmers' Markets -- A national listing of farmers' markets.
3.
Local Harvest -- This Web site will help you find
farmers' markets, family farms, and other sources of sustainably grown food in
your area where you can buy produce, grass-fed meats, and many other goodies.
4.
Eat Well Guide: Wholesome Food from Healthy Animals -- The Eat Well Guide is a free online
directory of sustainably raised meat, poultry, dairy, and eggs from farms,
stores, restaurants, inns, and hotels, and online outlets in the United States
and Canada.
5.
Community Involved in Sustaining Agriculture (CISA) -- CISA is dedicated to sustaining
agriculture and promoting the products of small farms.
6.
FoodRoutes -- The FoodRoutes ÒFind Good FoodÓ map can
help you connect with local farmers to find the freshest, tastiest food
possible. On their interactive map, you can find a listing for local farmers,
CSAs, and markets near you.
(end of
article)
CONCLUSION
Pioneers in
organic agriculture such as Andre Voisin, William Albrecht, and even as far
back as George Carver and other great scientists warned about the consequences
of using superphosphate fertilizers.
Their warning went unheeded because the increase in crop yield was so
amazing and lucrative.
Only now, in
the 1990s and later, have more agricultural scientists begun to wonder about
what we have lost or created as a result of the green revolution of the 20th
century on earth.
This is
completely analogous to the questioning that is now occurring concerning the
wholesale use of medical drugs that mainly stimulate, suppress and alter the
body at symptomatic levels, while intoxicating the person and causing Òside
effectsÓ, in too many cases. The
excitement over drugs is similar to the excitement over superphosphates, and
the financial gain for drug companies is similar to the financial gain for some
large agricultural firms.
I predict
that this questioning will increase in the future, as it must in order to
correct the problems that have been caused with our food, our livestock, our
soil and our entire environment due to the 20th century green
revolution in agriculture.
Home | Hair Analysis | Saunas | Books | Articles | Detox Protocols | Courses | About Dr. Wilson