farming Archives - Amazing Health Advances

U.S. Approves World’s First GMO Wheat Grown with Banned Neurotoxic Herbicide

The AHA! Team — Mon, 23 Jun 2025 20:30:56 +0000

Stephanie Woods via NaturalHealth365 – While corporations and even our government tamper with our food, yet another addition is making its way to U.S. soil. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) recently approved the cultivation of genetically modified (GM) wheat. The first GM wheat in the world comes from Bioceres, an Argentinean company, and French company Florimond Desprez. While Argentina is currently the “only” place where GM wheat products are being consumed, this toxic food is heading to the United States. The movement to deregister GM wheat products is strong and relentless. It will eventually happen, likely sooner rather than later. To avoid this, it is a good idea to begin preparations now. The hidden dangers of glufosinate ammonium One of the biggest concerns about GMO wheat is that it is grown with glufosinate ammonium. This highly dangerous agrotoxin has been banned in the European Union due to its serious health risks. Exposure to glufosinate ammonium has been linked to a range of concerning health impacts, including gastrointestinal issues such as mouth ulcers, abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and sore throat. Cardiovascular problems like low blood pressure (hypotension) and slow heart rate (bradycardia) have also been reported. Neurological effects can range from drowsiness, headaches, agitation, tremors, stupor, confusion, and dizziness to severe outcomes like seizures, retrograde amnesia, coma, and even respiratory failure. Additionally, respiratory complications such as hypoxia and shortness of breath pose significant threats. Given these alarming risks, it’s clear that we must actively avoid products containing this harmful chemical. Unfortunately, we cannot rely on government agencies to protect us; their actions often suggest the opposite. We must stay informed, make conscious choices, and take control of our health and well-being. Too many red flags to ignore! When it comes to GM wheat, the red flags are impossible to overlook. For starters, no publicly available studies or documentation prove its safety. Despite being heavily promoted as “drought resistant,” no credible evidence supports this claim. In fact, GM wheat hasn’t even demonstrated higher productivity compared to conventional wheat. The situation in Argentina highlights another major concern. The country’s National Commission on Biotechnology, the central authority responsible for approving GM foods, is largely made up of representatives from companies that profit from selling GMOs. With such an obvious conflict of interest, there are virtually no checks and balances in place to ensure transparency or accountability. These glaring issues make it clear that GM wheat comes with far more questions than answers. How to avoid GM wheat: Take control of your food choices Avoiding GM wheat is entirely possible with some mindful shopping habits. One of the most effective strategies is to buy organic. Foods with the Certified Organic seal are prohibited from containing GMOs, offering a reliable safeguard against genetically modified ingredients. When shopping, look for the Non-GMO Project Verified seal. While many products claim to be “non-GMO,” this official certification ensures a higher standard of transparency and accountability, giving you greater confidence in your purchases. Another essential step is to avoid processed foods. Whole, organic foods are far less likely to contain GMOs, while processed foods are notorious for sneaking them in through various additives and fillers. Whenever possible, buy directly from local farms. This supports the local economy, allows you to ask questions about farming practices, and helps to ensure you get clean, high-quality food. The reality is that the tampering with our food supply isn’t likely to stop anytime soon. Governments and large corporations often prioritize profit and convenience over nutrition and public health. That means it’s up to us to take matters into our own hands – to educate ourselves, make informed choices, and seek out healthy alternatives to the heavily processed, GMO-laden products they want to push on us. It’s time to stand firm. Every purchase is a choice, a step towards reclaiming control over our health. Push back. Choose better. Sources for this article include: Childrenshealthdefense.org Sciencedirect.com NIH.gov To read the original article click here.

The post U.S. Approves World’s First GMO Wheat Grown with Banned Neurotoxic Herbicide appeared first on Amazing Health Advances.

Strawberries Bloom Once Again Near the Gaza Border

The AHA! Team — Wed, 30 Apr 2025 05:32:14 +0000

Zachy Hennessey via Israel21c – Owner of Uri Tutim farm says it will take the region’s agriculture a long time to recover, but its very existence is nothing short of a miracle. “Let me take you down ’cause I’m going to strawberry fields.” This line from the Beatles’ “Strawberry Fields Forever” was ringing in my ears as I made my way to Uri Tutim (Uri’s Strawberries) farm in Moshav Yesha near the Gaza border. The strawberry fields the Beatles sang about were actually a reference to Salvation Army Homes. Meanwhile, I was heading to a farm located in the Western Negev that was among many others that were ravaged by the Hamas attacks on October 7, 2023. “Even before October 7, there were rocket hits in our greenhouses; an American woman was killed inside the moshav by a rocket once,” the farm’s owner, Uri Patkin, tells ISRAEL21c. From high-tech to farming Patkin, 55, grew up in Yesha, helping his father run the family farm. Eventually he moved to the center of the country, where he worked in high-tech for nearly a decade. “At the age of 35, I left my job and I told my parents I was coming back to the Negev to become a farmer. My dad told me I was crazy,” he says with a laugh. “But by that time I was already married and had children. I thought it would be better to raise a family in a moshav than in the city, closer to the land and nature.” At first, he worked at his father’s prominent flower farm. Shortly afterwards, however, he decided to start cultivating strawberries and business took off. For years, Uri’s Strawberries exported most of its produce to the biggest supermarket chains in Europe. When it became more financially lucrative for Europeans to import produce from countries like Egypt and Morocco, Patkin didn’t scale back; he just redirected the goods to the local market. Special technique One of the main reasons for Patkin’s success was the introduction of a special growing technique that not many Israeli farms were using at the time: planting in containers or baskets suspended from the top of the greenhouse. “The results of the method are high-quality berries with a shelf life that’s longer than what is customary for strawberries,” notes Patkin. Avoiding direct contact with the soil leads to less fungi and mold, requires fewer pesticides and makes picking easier for farm workers. “We also pluck out the bottom leaves, so that way the strawberry is always ventilated by dry air, free of invaders.” Although this method requires infrastructure and larger investments per unit area, he says, it also yields much more produce per unit. ‘The worst day of my life’ Patkin says that even before the October 7 attacks, there were constant “rounds of violence” launched by Gaza terrorist groups toward Israel. “It used to discourage people from coming to work or live here because every few weeks, sometimes every few days, missiles can start falling from the sky,” notes Patkin. But nothing could have prepared Patkin or other residents of the area for that Black Saturday. “It was the worst day of my life; people were being killed all around me,” he recalls. Five of the six were killed in the fighting Yesha was among the very few communities in the area that managed to fight off the invading terrorists thanks to six members of moshav’s emergency squad. However, five of the six were killed in the fighting: Lior Ben Yaakov, Gil Avital, Itai Nachmias, Tal Maban and Dan Assulin. And as they retreated from the moshav, the surviving terrorists kidnapped or killed foreign workers from Thailand. “The foreign workers are not part of this conflict between Palestinians and Israel, and they found themselves on the battlefield. I feel a lot of personal responsibility over that,” Patkin tells ISRAEL21c. Patkin himself was out helping the few IDF soldiers who finally reach the moshav in the afternoon hours. “I had to accompany the army, while taking care of the dead and the wounded, something I don’t recommend anyone go through in their life,” he says. A long time for full rehabilitation By October 8, nearly all Yesha residents were evacuated, except for the replacement emergency squad. A day later, all foreign workers followed. Patkin was among the few residents who never left the moshav, even when his entire family was evacuated. “We were ready to give up on agriculture. We thought, ‘At least we’re alive and healthy.’ But three days later, waves upon waves of volunteers from all over the country showed up, telling us they’re here to save agriculture,” Patkin recalls. He says that for the first three to four months after the attack, agriculture at the moshav was kept going by volunteers, who ultimately saved it. “Our type of agriculture is intense; it’s not like wheat that you plant and it just grows. Every day you have to do agrotechnical work and supervision.” Eventually, Israel began recruiting new agricultural workers from around the world to help rehabilitate the region. “This is what got the farms back on their feet, but still not to the scale they were before October 7,” he says. “I personally revived only about 50% of my farm; it will take a long time for it to fully rehabilitate.” By now, 90 percent of Yesha residents have come back to the moshav. Uri Tutim welcomes tourists to visit and pick strawberries by hand for a small admission fee. These visits help support not only the farm, but the entire region that is still hurting from what it endured. For more information, click here. To read the original article click here.

The post Strawberries Bloom Once Again Near the Gaza Border appeared first on Amazing Health Advances.

Nebraska Moves to Ban Lab-Grown Meat, Joins Push Against Fake Food

The AHA! Team — Fri, 21 Mar 2025 05:15:50 +0000

Lance D Johnson via Natural News – Lab-grown meat, also known as cultivated meat, is produced by isolating animal cells and growing them in a lab using a mix of chemicals, growth hormones, and nutrients. While proponents argue it offers environmental benefits, critics warn of its potential health risks. Nebraska Gov. Jim Pillen proposes banning lab-grown meat production and sale to protect the state’s farmers and ranchers. The ban, part of a national backlash, follows similar actions in Florida and Alabama, with ten other states requiring clear labeling. Critics highlight potential health risks and the unnatural production process of lab-grown meat, which involves chemicals and growth hormones. The movement opposes globalist agendas and billionaire-funded initiatives, such as those promoted by the World Economic Forum. The push aims to reclaim control of the food supply, prioritizing traditional agriculture and natural food over synthetic alternatives. Legislative Bill 246, would prohibit the sale of lab-grown meat in grocery stores Nebraska Governor Jim Pillen has announced a proposal to ban lab-grown meat from production and sale within the Cornhusker State. The announcement, made on Monday, places Nebraska at the forefront of a growing national backlash against fake food pushed by billionaire-funded agendas and globalist organizations like the World Economic Forum. With Florida and Alabama already enacting similar bans and ten other states mandating clear labeling, the fight against lab-grown meat is gaining momentum. Gov. Pillen, a farmer himself, framed the proposal as a defense of Nebraska’s farmers and ranchers, who form the backbone of the state’s economy. “It’s important we get on the offense so that Nebraska farmers and ranchers are not undermined,” Pillen said at a news conference. The proposed ban, introduced as Legislative Bill 246, would prohibit the sale of lab-grown meat in grocery stores, although consumers could still purchase it online for delivery. The health risks of lab-grown meat Lab-grown meat, also known as cultivated meat, is produced by isolating animal cells and growing them in a lab using a mix of chemicals, growth hormones, and nutrients. While proponents argue it offers environmental benefits, critics warn of its potential health risks. Julie Auch, a Republican representative from South Dakota, highlighted the unsettling process behind lab-grown meat: “Thirteen essential amino acids, glucose, six inorganic salts—which is another name for chemicals—and eight water-soluble vitamins and blood serum is how this meat is actually produced.” Lack of long-term studies on the health effects of consuming lab-grown meat raises serious concerns. Unlike traditional meat, which has been a staple of human diets for millennia, lab-grown alternatives are a product of modern biotechnology, raising questions about their safety and nutritional value. Gov. Pillen expressed skepticism about relying on labels to inform consumers, citing the example of almond milk. “There is no way. It’s almond nut juice,” he said. “It’s not milk, and it’s a full-blown attack on the milk industry.” A growing movement against fake food Nebraska’s proposal is part of a broader pushback against lab-grown meat, which has been championed by billionaires like Bill Gates and global organizations like the World Economic Forum. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who banned lab-grown meat earlier this year, declared, “Take your fake lab-grown meat elsewhere. We’re not doing that in the state of Florida.” DeSantis framed the ban as a rejection of the WEF’s agenda to replace traditional diets with lab-grown meat and insects. The Trump administration’s “Make America Healthy Again” initiative, which prioritizes natural, clean food, is expected to further fuel this movement. With Robert F. Kennedy Jr. poised to lead the Department of Health and Human Services, there is optimism that the federal government will take decisive action to protect America’s food supply from what critics describe as a dystopian vision of the future. Movement to prioritize real, clean food over synthetic alternatives is gaining strength The fight against lab-grown meat is not just about protecting farmers or preserving tradition—it’s about reclaiming control of the food supply from mega-corporations and returning it to small, family-owned farms. As Gov. Pillen put it, “We’re going to be aggressive and not let that happen to the rest of the industries.” With Nebraska joining the ranks of states taking a stand against lab-grown meat, the movement to prioritize real, clean food over synthetic alternatives is gaining strength. As Americans become more aware of the risks associated with lab-grown meat, the push to protect traditional agriculture and public health is likely to grow. Sources for this article include: ZeroHedge.com NebraskaExaminer.com SDPB.com To read the original article, click here

The post Nebraska Moves to Ban Lab-Grown Meat, Joins Push Against Fake Food appeared first on Amazing Health Advances.

Scientists Tackle Farm Nutrient Pollution with Sustainable, Affordable Designer Biochar Pellets

The AHA! Team — Wed, 12 Feb 2025 06:21:05 +0000

University of Illinois College of Agricultural, Consumer & Environmental Sciences via EurekAlert! – What if farmers could not only prevent excess phosphorus from polluting downstream waterways, but also recycle that nutrient as a slow-release fertilizer, all without spending a lot of money? In a first-of-its-kind field study, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign researchers show it’s possible and economical. “Phosphorus removal structures have been developed to capture dissolved phosphorus from tile drainage systems, but current phosphorus sorption materials are either inefficient or they are industrial waste products that aren’t easy to dispose of. This motivated us to develop an eco-friendly and acceptable material to remove phosphorus from tile drainage systems,” said study author Hongxu Zhou, who completed the study as a doctoral student in the Department of Agricultural and Biological Engineering (ABE), part of the College of Agricultural, Consumer and Environmental Sciences and The Grainger College of Engineering at U. of I. Zhou and his co-authors used sawdust and lime sludge, byproducts from milling and drinking water treatment plants, respectively. They mixed the two ingredients, formed the mixture into pellets, and slow-burned them under low-oxygen conditions to create a “designer” biochar with significantly higher phosphorus-binding capacity compared to lime sludge or biochar alone. Importantly, once these pellets bind all the phosphorus they can hold, they can be spread onto fields where the captured nutrient is slowly released over time. The team tested pellets in working field conditions for the first time Leveraging designer biochar’s many sustainable properties, the team tested pellets in working field conditions for the first time, monitoring phosphorus removal in Fulton County, Illinois, fields for two years. Like the majority of Midwestern corn and soybean fields, the experimental fields were fitted with subsurface drainage pipes. This drainage water flowed through phosphorus removal structures filled with designer biochar pellets of two different sizes. The team tested 2-3 centimeter biochar pellets during the first year of the experiment, then replaced them with 1 cm pellets for the second year. Both pellet sizes removed phosphorus, but the 1-centimeter pellets performed much better, reaching 38 to 41% phosphorus removal efficiency, compared with 1.3 to 12% efficiency for the larger pellets. The result was not a surprise for study co-author Wei Zheng, who said smaller particle sizes allow more contact time for phosphorus to stick on designer biochar. Zheng, a principal research scientist at the Illinois Sustainable Technology Center (ISTC), part of the Prairie Research Institute at U. of I., has done previous laboratory studies showing a powdered form of designer biochar is highly efficient for phosphorus removal. But powdered materials wouldn’t work in the field. Smaller particle sizes allow more contact time for phosphorus to stick on designer biochar “If we put powder-form biochar in the field, it would easily wash away,” Zhou said. “This is why we have to make pellets. We have to sacrifice some efficiency to ensure the system will work under field conditions.” After showing the pellets are effective in real-world scenarios, the research team performed techno-economic and life-cycle analyses to evaluate the economic breakdown for farmers and the overall sustainability of the system. The cost to produce designer biochar pellets was estimated at $413 per ton, less than half the market cost of alternatives such as granular activated carbon ($800-$2,500 per ton). The team also estimated the total cost of phosphorus removal using the system, arriving at an average cost of $359 per kilogram removed. This figure varied according to inflation and depending on the frequency of replacing pellets — two years appeared to be the most cost-effective scenario. The life cycle analysis showed the system — including returning spent biochar pellets to crop fields and avoiding additional phosphorus and other inputs — could save 12 to 200 kilograms of carbon dioxide-equivalent per kilogram of phosphorus removed. Zhou says the benefits go beyond nutrient loss reduction and carbon sequestration to include energy production, reduction of eutrophication, and improving soils. “At the moment, there’s no regulation that requires farmers to remove phosphorus from drainage water. But we know there are many conservation conscious farmers who want to reduce nitrate and phosphorus losses from their fields,” said co-author Rabin Bhattarai, associate professor in ABE. “If they’re already installing a woodchip bioreactor to remove nitrate, all they’d have to do is add the pellets to the control structure to remove the phosphorus at the same time. And there’s something very attractive about being able to reuse the pellets on the fields.” The study, “Exploring the engineering-scale potential of designer biochar pellets for phosphorus loss reduction from tile-drained agroecosystems,” is published in Water Research [DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2024.122500]. The research was supported by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency [grant no. 84008801] and the Illinois Nutrient Research and Education Council [grant no. 2019–4–360232]. This work earned Zhou first place (Ph.D. category) in the prestigious 2024 Boyd-Scott Graduate Research Award from the American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers. He is now a postdoctoral research associate in ISTC. Zheng is also an adjunct faculty in ABE. Journal Water Research DOI 10.1016/j.watres.2024.122500 To read the original article click here.

The post Scientists Tackle Farm Nutrient Pollution with Sustainable, Affordable Designer Biochar Pellets appeared first on Amazing Health Advances.

Can an Ancient Farming Method Improve Sustainability?

The AHA! Team — Thu, 06 Feb 2025 06:14:38 +0000

John Jeffay via Israel21c – Researchers say plot-and-berm method could address current challenges of water scarcity and food insecurity, especially in arid areas. An ancient farming method that made the deserts of the Middle East bloom 1,000 years ago should be revived today, say experts in Israel. The “plot-and-berm” system, developed in the early Islamic period along the Mediterranean coast, used innovative water-harvesting and soil-enrichment technologies to grow vegetables, watermelons, dates, and grapes. Plots were dug in places where the water table was high, and farmers added urban waste to the sand to improve its fertility. Berms were the sand barriers built to stop the sand/waste mix from being blown away by wind or washed away by water. Experts at Bar-Ilan University, University of Haifa and the Israel Antiquities Authority say an updated form of plot-and-berm could work effectively as a sustainable, modern-day alternative to existing forms of agriculture in hot, sandy parts of the world. They’ve been studying what they call SGHAS (traditional sunken groundwater-harvesting agroecosystems) in sandy areas of Israel, Iran, Egypt, Algeria, Gaza and the Atlantic coast of Iberia. They used a combination of geospatial analysis, archeological findings, and historical documentation. Their conclusion is that this early Islamic farming method was way ahead of its time in terms of agricultural knowhow. But plot-and-berms were largely abandoned after the 12th century Crusader conquest. The method was adopted elsewhere, in the Middle Ages and again in the early 20th century, but not in Israel or many other parts of the region. The research team says plot-and-berm has much to offer and neatly addresses current challenges of water scarcity and food insecurity, especially in arid areas. “The reappearance in the Middle Ages … and early 20th century in Iberia suggests that this type of agriculture is adaptable to varying economic and cultural settings and therefore may possess potential for certain, current socio-agronomic scenarios,” said Prof. Joel Roskin from Bar-Ilan’s Department of Environment, Planning and Sustainability. His team’s research on plot-and-berms, which was funded by the Israel Science Foundation, has been published in the journal Environmental Archaeology, entitled “Character and Evolution of Sunken Groundwater-Harvesting Agroecosystems in Aeolian Sand since Early Islamic Times, between Iran and Iberia.” The paper explains how modern agriculture often relies on intensive water usage and practices that deplete soil quality, while traditional systems like plot-and-berm are low-impact and more sustainable. Farmers living in hot, dry and sandy conditions between the ninth and 12th centuries made the most of the limited assets they had — shallow groundwater and a ready supply of organic waste from nearby towns and cities. To read the original article click here.

The post Can an Ancient Farming Method Improve Sustainability? appeared first on Amazing Health Advances.

DISASTER in the Making: Pesticides Are Damaging Vital Soil Organisms, New Study Suggests

AHA Publisher — Fri, 28 May 2021 07:00:36 +0000

Damon Hines via NaturalHealth365 – Global soils are the source of all life on land. They produce food, store carbon, and purify water. If topsoil is lost through “bad treatment,” it takes thousands of years until the soil is produced again. Pesticides and chemical poisons qualify as “bad treatment,” and without urgent action to halt the degradation caused by pesticides, pollution, and intensive farming, the future of global soils is bleak. The pesticides and chemical poisons applied to agricultural soil are causing widespread damage to the vital organisms and microbial life that help keep soils healthy. According to research published in Frontiers in Environmental Science, “negative effects are evident in both lab and field studies, across all studied pesticide classes, and in a wide variety of soil organisms and endpoints.” Scientists found 71% of the tested parameters showed negative effects from pesticide exposure, including earthworms, beetles, springtails, and other organisms. It’s Time to Stop Treating Soil Like Dirt The numbers are staggering. A third of the Earth’s land is severely degraded, and fertile soil is being lost at the rate of 24 billion tons a year. According to soil scientist Dr. Rattan Lal, 135 billion tons of soil have been lost from farmland since the Industrial Revolution. If that rate of degradation continues, researchers say the world’s topsoil could be gone in 60 years, which is a grim projection considering topsoil is where 95% of the planet’s food is grown. Out of Sight, Out Mind … But the Damage Is Being Done It’s easy to overlook that vital soil organisms play a crucial role in the food web. While toxic pesticides lurk in up to 70% of the produce in the U.S., contaminate groundwater in rural areas, and have been found to concentrate in the milk and meat of farmed animals through contaminated feed, researchers warn that soil organisms aren’t often considered when accessing the impact of pesticides and toxic farm chemicals. For example, why is it that the U.S. tests chemicals on honeybees – insects that may never come into contact with soil – but not invertebrates? According to Professor Nico Eisenhauer of Leipzig University, microbial species are essential for turning waste into nutrients, but 99% of them have yet to be studied by scientists. In fact, a quarter of all the animal species on Earth live beneath our feet -out of sight, out of mind -and provide the nutrients for our food. One teaspoon of healthy soil can contain up to a billion bacteria and more than 1km of fungi, algae, and other microfauna. How to Tackle the Decline in Biodiversity Protecting soil structure needs to be included in the modern farming system. While the UN continually stresses the importance of soils to future food security, “soil awareness” and the impact toxic pesticides have on vital organisms doesn’t get the big headlines like, say, Roundup cancer lawsuits or the increasing threat of dicamba drift. It’s time to work with the natural system and not fight against it. Raising awareness is the first step — the next step: better land regulation, improved farming efficiency, and EPA regulations on agricultural pesticides. Sources for this article include: Theguardian.com Theguardian.com To read the original article click here. For more articles from NaturalHealth365 click here.

The post DISASTER in the Making: Pesticides Are Damaging Vital Soil Organisms, New Study Suggests appeared first on Amazing Health Advances.

Regenerative Agriculture: Principles, Pioneers + Does It Really Work?

AHA Publisher — Fri, 14 May 2021 07:00:13 +0000

Leah Zerbe, MS, NASM-CPT, NASM-CES via Dr. Axe – Organic. Natural. Permaculture. Regenerative agriculture. It’s a great time to get more connected to the farming practices behind our food. What, exactly, do all of those farming terms really mean? And how do we know if they’re legit or just marketing fluff? One thing is for sure. If we’re going to create enough food without destroying our natural resources and health, we’ve got to embrace regenerative agriculture on a major scale. What is it, exactly? I’m glad you asked. What Is Regenerative Agriculture? It may be beneficial to first explain what regenerative agriculture isn’t. Have you ever driven down a country road, stumbling upon miles and miles of corn, canola or soy fields? That isn’t regenerative agriculture. That’s a monoculture system where farmers plant a lot one one type of crop. It’s not good for the soil; it’s not good for nature, biodiversity and water supplies; and, oftentimes, the crops aren’t even good for people. I really like this definition from the Carbon Underground and Regenerative Agriculture Initiative at California State University, Chico: ‘Regenerative Agriculture’ describes farming and grazing practices that, among other benefits, reverse climate change by rebuilding soil organic matter and restoring degraded soil biodiversity – resulting in both carbon drawdown and improving the water cycle. Regenerative agriculture treats the land more holistically, taking a big-picture approach instead of worrying only about crop yields. One way of putting it? It works more closely with natural tendencies rather than against them. Instead of using abusive inputs like pesticides, chemical fertilizers, fumigants and GMOs to push the limits of production, regenerative agriculture uses a set of farming principles to not just create food, but a better world, too. In essence, it improves resources rather than depleting them. BDon’t dismiss this utopian way of farming as an out-of-reach dream. It’s already happening all over the word, and it’s scientifically backed to boot, pulling from decades of research investigating organic farming methods, holistic grazing, agroforestry and agroecology. But more on that later. Regenerative agriculture involves practices that: Increase biodiversity Enrich the soil Improve water quality Enhance ecosystem services Reverse climate change (This is especially important since we know climate change and nutrition are intricately linked.) The best side effect? It also creates higher yields and helps crops become more resilient in times of climate instability. In terms of community, regenerative farming boosts health and vitality for people living in the community. In other words, it’s better for the land and for us. Terra Genesis International breaks regenerative agriculture into four main principles, which are further broken down into key principles. Progressively improve whole agroecosystems Create context: Specific designs and holistic decisions that express the essence of each farm Ensure and develop just and reciprocal relationships among all stakeholders Continually grow and evolve individuals, farms and communities to actualize their innate potentials Key practices of regenerative farming include: No-till farming and pasture cropping Organic annual cropping Compost and compost tea Biochar and terra preta Holistically managed grazing Animal integration Ecological aquaculture Perennial crops Silvopasture/agroforestry Let’s take a deeper dive into some these practices below… Agroforestry, Including Silvopasture Practiced around the world for centuries, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) defines agroforestry as the “intentional integration of trees and shrubs into crop and animal farming systems to create environmental, economic and social benefits.” Agroforestry is gaining momentum in the U.S. today because it gives farmers more food crop options to diversify their farm sales. A 2017 study published in Agroforestry Systems shows how incorporating berry- and nut-bearing trees and shrubs with hay and more traditional row crops can increase diversity and income for a farm. Patience is key here. For crops like chestnuts and hazelnuts, meaningful harvests could take seven to 12 years to materialize after planting. The idea, though, is the annual hay or vegetable crops bring annual income until the trees and shrubs produce adequate yields. The main takeaway is farmers can incorporate agroforestry to move toward polyculture instead of relying on just one crop (monoculture). The USDA points out that agroforestry generally involves the four “I”s: Intentional (that blueberry shrub didn’t just plant itself!) Intensive Integrated Interactive Here in America, agroforestry is typically broken up into five categories: 1. Silvopasture The practice of combining trees with livestock at the same place. The idea is that animals benefit from tree cover during heatwaves, rainstorms and other inclement weather, all while the trees provide timber, fruit or nut crops, and forage. The combining of trees and livestock is done in a beneficial way that also promotes stronger soil health. Silvopasture is the most common agroforestry practice in the U.S. It’s particularly popular in the Southeast. 2. Alley Cropping The practice of planting crops between rows of trees to generate farm income as the trees mature. Grains, herbs, flowers, fruit and vegetables are all examples of crops that can be planted in between tree rows. 3. Forest Farming Multistory cropping where different layers produce food. This is related to food forests and food gardens common in permaculture design. Here’s a great food forest guide from Desert Echo. It includes ideas for the following food forest layers: canopy, low-tree, shrub, herbacious, ground cover, rhizosphere, vertical. May also provide shelter for animals. 4. Windbreaks Common on farms to help protect barns, farmhouses and other buildings, and animals from wind, snow, dust and odors Known as living fences or shelterbelts Also support wildlife Choose native tree species for big biodiversity bang for your buck 5. Riparian Forest Buffers Riparian forest buffers are natural or re-established areas along rivers and streams made up of trees, shrubs and grasses. These buffers can help filter farm runoff while the roots stabilize the banks of streams, rivers, lakes and ponds to prevent erosion. These areas can also support wildlife and provide another source of income. Sustainable Livestock Management This includes techniques like rotational grazing but even more so holistically managed grazing. What’s the difference? The Jefferson Center for Holistic Management provides nice background. Rotational Grazing Focuses on moving livestock from one area of pasture to another Protects the soil and pasture plants from compaction and overgrazing Only focuses on moving the livestock to fresh pasture; doesn’t involve the timing of the moves Mob Grazing Focuses on keeping a larger number of animals on a smaller tract of pasture They are moved frequently, sometimes as often as three times a day Related to rotational grazing Plant recovery time isn’t part of the consideration for when to move the livestock Holistic Planned Grazing Gold-standard practice Takes more factors into consideration compared to mob or rotational grazing Amount of time livestock spend on plants and recovery time needed for plants considered Is customized based on the social, economic and environmental factors and needs of each particular ranch Promotes biodiversity, so grazing plans account for nesting and breeding seasons of different animals and birds Better pasture management isn’t just better for plants and animals, either. It’s also great news for more breathable air and a healthy atmosphere. Cows raised on pastures using best management practices produce roughly 22 percent fewer methane emissions. Methane is a potent greenhouse gas. Sometimes, though, images, not words, can really convey a message. Check out this video showing conventional land versus holistically managed land: As you can see, careful planning can drastically improve biodiversity and health both above and below the soil. Carbon Helps Climate Change Healthy soil is teeming with microorganisms that help store carbon in the soil, keeping it out of the atmosphere where it promotes climate change. I’d like to think there are parallels we can draw from the microbiome and gut health. When our digestive tracts are flourishing with diverse, beneficial microorganisms, we are healthier. The same is true of our soil. The truth is, shifting to regenerative agriculture on a major scale could return atmospheric carbon dioxide levels to pre-industrial levels, in effect reversing global warming. Research from the Rodale Institute, an organic experimental farm in Pennsylvania, shows that regenerative farming is a legitimate tool for not just slowing, but actually reversing climate change. Here are some major points in the Rodale Institute’s 2014 white paper: If we took all currently available cropland and shifted it to regenerative, organic agriculture methods, up to 40 percent of annual emissions could be captured in the soil. Adding pastures around the world to the regenerative agriculture model could increase the amount of carbon stored to 71 percent. The good news? Nothing needs to be invented to create this type of carbon sequestration. It’s available now, costs little to implement and, as a side benefit, reduces the need for cancer-causing farming chemicals. Many regenerative agriculture techniques help promote healthier carbon levels in the soil, including: Crop rotation Compost Residual mulching Cover crops Conservation tillage Crop Rotation Growing the same crop year after year in the same spot is a recipe for pest infestations, diseased plants, the need for toxic chemicals and lower yields. When you smartly plan and plant your crop rotation, you can build up the soil and grow truly resilient plants. While the most widely known benefits of corp rotation include nutrient retention and nitrogen fixation, which serves as a natural fertilizer for the next crop, there are other benefits to consider, too. Certain crops influence the rhizosphere around the root systems, causing some minerals to be more easily utilized by the next crop. This helps boost the next crop’s plant health and immunity, which often results in higher yields, according to Advancing Eco Agriculture. The idea is that something planted today will change the soil in a way that influences future crops. Compost Compost is the result of recycling organic matter and using it as a soil amendment. It’s also a hallmark of regenerative agriculture. Rich in humus and humic acids, compost also serves as a natural pesticide in the soil. Basic DIY compost principles involve taking waste like leaves and food scraps and allowing worms, fungi and aerobic bacteria to convert it to a soil enhancer. Compost helps saturate the soil with missing microbes, reducing the risk plants will suffer from nutrient deficiencies, diseases, insect damage and drought-related stress. There’s money to be made when it comes to compost, too. Some farms that nix the use of chemical fertilizer and transition to using compost and compost tea experience savings in the hundreds of thousands of dollars range! Better soil, healthier crops and lower bills — who could argue with that? Did you know compost benefits also include a reduction in soil erosion? This has two major benefits. First, it helps the soil store more water, which field tests show helps increase organic crop yields during years of drought. (Organic crops actually outperformed industrial, chemical agriculture crops in years of drought because of this.) Soil scientist Elaine Ingham, Ph.D., is an advocate of thermal composting, something you can even try at home. Perennial Crops A common practice in regenerative agriculture involves planting perennial crops. While not all crops on a regenerative farm need to be perennial, shifting more land into perennial crops and pastures helps minimize soil disruption. This is a key concept of permaculture, where design focuses on replicating how things work in nature. It’s like working with nature to create food, not against it. The idea is that with this permanent design, the workload becomes easier and the crop yields increase with time. Multi-canopy food forests are also key permaculture concepts utilized by many regenerative farms. In fact, permaculture and regenerative agriculture can work hand-in-hand as an effective way to feed the world without using chemicals. Regenerative Agriculture vs. Permaculture vs. Organic Gardening While there is some overlap between regenerative agriculture, permaculture, and organic farming and gardening, there are notable differences, too. Organic Farming/Gardening “Organic agriculture provides a base set of standards. It’s all about minimizing toxins and slightly maximizing nutritional value, although the studies are mixed,” Jordan Rubin, founder of Heal the Planet Farm explained. “The main gist is producing food not laden with chemicals.” That’s certainly good news and a vast improvement from...

The post Regenerative Agriculture: Principles, Pioneers + Does It Really Work? appeared first on Amazing Health Advances.

Fungi Could Manipulate Bacteria to Enrich Soil with Nutrients

AHA Publisher — Mon, 05 Apr 2021 07:00:16 +0000

Boyce Thompson Institute via EurekAlert – ITHACA, NY, April 2, 2021 – A team of researchers from the Boyce Thompson Institute (BTI) has discovered a distinct group of bacteria that may help fungi and plants acquire soil nutrients. The findings could point the way to cost-effective and eco-friendly methods of enriching soil and improving crop yields, reducing farmers’ reliance on conventional fertilizers. Researchers know that arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) fungi establish symbiotic relationships with the roots of 70% of all land plants. In this relationship, plants trade fatty acids for the fungi’s nitrogen and phosphorus. However, AM fungi lack the enzymes needed to free nitrogen and phosphorus from complex organic molecules. A trio of BTI scientists led by Maria Harrison, the William H. Crocker Professor at BTI, wondered whether other soil microbes might help the fungi access those nutrients. In a first step towards examining that possibility, the team investigated whether AM fungi associate with a specific community of bacteria. The research was described in a paper published in The ISME Journal on March 1. The team examined bacteria living on the surfaces of long filament-like structures called hyphae, which the fungi extend into the soil far from their host plant. On hyphae from two species of fungi, the team discovered highly similar bacterial communities whose composition was distinct from those in the surrounding soil. “This tells us that, just like the human gut or plant roots, the hyphae of AM fungi have their own unique microbiomes,” said Harrison, who is also an adjunct professor in Cornell University’s School of Integrative Plant Science. “We’re already testing a few interesting predictions as to what these bacteria might do, such as helping with phosphate acquisition.” “If we’re right, then enriching the soil for some of these bacteria could increase crop yields and, ultimately, reduce the need for conventional fertilizers along with their associated costs and environmental impacts,” she added. Her co-researchers on the study were former BTI scientists Bryan Emmett and Véronique Lévesque-Tremblay. Among the Fungi In the study, the team used two species of AM fungi, Glomus versiforme and Rhizophagus irregularis, and grew them in three different types of soil in symbiosis with Brachypodium distachyon, a grass species related to wheat. After letting the fungus grow with the grass for up to 65 days, the researchers used gene sequencing to identify bacteria sticking to the hyphae surfaces. The team found remarkable consistency in the makeup of bacterial communities from the two fungal species. Those communities were similar in all three soil types, but very different from those found in soil away from the filaments. The function of these bacteria is not yet clear, but their composition has already sparked some interesting possibilities, Harrison said. “We predict that some of these bacteria liberate phosphorus ions in the immediate vicinity of the filaments, giving the fungus the best chance to capture those ions,” Harrison said. “Learning which bacteria have this function could be key to enhancing the fungi’s phosphate acquisition process to benefit plants.” Harrison’s group is investigating the factors that control which bacteria assemble on the filaments. Harrison thinks the AM fungi may secrete molecules that attract these bacteria, and in turn, the bacterial communities may influence which molecules the fungus secretes. Highway Patrol Among the hyphae microbiomes were members of Myxococcales and other taxa that include “bacterial predators” that kill and eat other bacteria by causing them to burst and release their contents. These predators move by gliding along surfaces so “the fungal filaments could serve as linear feeding lanes,” said Emmett, who is currently a research microbiologist for the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Agricultural Research Service in Ames, Iowa. “Many soil bacteria appear to travel along fungal hyphae in soil, and these predators may make it a more perilous journey.” While not every member of those taxa on the filaments may be predatory, Harrison’s group plans to investigate how and why those putative predators assemble there. “It’s possible that the actions of predatory bacteria make mineral nutrients available to everyone in the surrounding soil – predators and fungi alike,” she said. To read the original article click here.

The post Fungi Could Manipulate Bacteria to Enrich Soil with Nutrients appeared first on Amazing Health Advances.

The Danger of “Big Meat” and How to Build a Healthier Food System

AHA Publisher — Mon, 21 Sep 2020 07:00:41 +0000

Damon Hines via NaturalHealth365 – Fact: 99 percent of America’s farms are “factory farms,” where millions of animals are crammed into windowless sheds and stuffed into wire cages, and the animal products – meat, dairy, and poultry – routinely contaminated with toxic pesticides, antibiotics, parasites, and pathogens. This is what we refer to as, the “Big Meat” industry and it’s at the heart of so many health issues. We can not ignore this reality: Big Meat is damaging to human health, as it’s loaded with artery clogging (toxic) fat – too much omega-6 and lower levels of beneficial omega-3 – which can lead to obesity, cancer, heart attacks, and a host of other serious and life-threatening health problems. Did you know that factory farms emit over 200 gases, including hydrogen sulfide and ammonia? These gases further compound Big Meat’s damage to human health and the environment. No, the facts can’t be changed. It’s too late for that. But we can rise up against them, find alternatives and new solutions, and do our part as consumers to consciously boycott Big Meat and its dirty deeds. The problem with “Big Meat” and a Call to Action The alternative to Big Meat is the “Regeneration Revolution,” an umbrella term that involves everything from farming innovation and consumer awareness to political/policy change, and new investment practices. America eats the cheapest, lowest grade food of any industrial nation. That’s right, taxpayer money helps to support a highly-toxic, food supply that’s slowing poisoning an entire nation. It’s a problem further exacerbated by American consumers’ love for fast food and highly processed, nutritionally-deficient foods. Roughly 80 percent of Americans patronize fast food restaurants, and the damage from the “Super Size Me” lifestyle is why America has become a leader in chronic diseases statistics and healthcare costs. But here’s the catch. The alternative to Big Meat is already in place. We don’t have to reinvent the wheel. The U.S. has a $60 billion market for organic and grass fed and pastured food. In addition, sales of plant-based alternative meat products (Impossible Burger, Beyond, etc.) have skyrockted. According to Neilsen, in May, sales of alternative meat products in grocery stores went up 264 percent. As a side note: we do not suggest that these highly-processed, plant-based burgers are any better for your health. But, it does illustrate a point. People truly want a greener, happier world. Sadly, politicians, Corporate America and Big Meat have other ideas in mind. The Unraveling of Ecosystems and Wasting Away of “Moral Imaginations” Factory farming and the food/water crisis are all aspects of a wider dysboisis – a term commonly used by scientists to describe the collapse of gut biomes, but in recent years has been used to define the unraveling of ecosystems. Radical change is needed to repair this “looming catastrophe,” a catastrophe of interlinked emergencies that scientists warn could result in global systemic collapse. Change starts with us, the consumers. Boycotting Big Meat will protect our health, protect the health of meat industry workers, protect family farms, farm animals, rural economies, water supplies, air quality, soil health, and wildlife biodiversity. Take a stand. Support local, organic and regenerative farms. Buy healthy, humane and environmentally-friendly foods. Author Mark O’ Connell sums it up best: “It’s not the melting of the ice-caps or the burning of the forests that seem to be the real apocalyptic scenario, but rather the slow atrophying of our moral imaginations.” Sources for this article include: Organicconsumers.org, Organicconsumers.org, Theguardian.com To read the original article click here. For more articles from NaturalHealth365 click here.

The post The Danger of “Big Meat” and How to Build a Healthier Food System appeared first on Amazing Health Advances.