:stop: Stop It Mrs Maiden .no offense taken. I look to Your advice like gospel in certain areas so truly writing down bits of what i didn't know. .Knew about urine but ashes? ? Another reason i adore This farm so much ...#KNOWLEDGE
Yep, lemme find the study for you. Urine alone still outperformed, but adding a small amount of wood ashes performed the best.
K, the original paper:
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jf9018917
And a Nat Geo article on the study:
This Fact I'll never Think about debating ..But when the debate turns quality and such i guess ima Fence rider. Im going with what's helping my bulging fractured discs in back. .and what's getting me baked so i can muster strength to read and Enjoy family. .No denying science again. .But would love to to know numbers Organic Vs Salts sales wise. Cuz it's all like voting for Year Book Titles and prom queens. .just my 2©
And I *can't* argue the finer points of the flavor and/or scent thing, because it's all the same to me. Now, if something feels harsh, smokes harsh, I can speak to that. But when folks get like they're doing a wine tasting, it's beyond my sense abilities.
The only reason for extra veggies or a vegan diet for a cancer patient is because cancer reacts {in their favor} to meat protein; particularily red meat:
In 2007, the American Institute for Cancer Research (AICR) published their second review of the major studies on food, nutrition, and cancer prevention. For cancers of the oesophagus, lung, pancreas, stomach, collorectum, endometrium, and prostate, it was determined that red meat (beef, pork, or lamb) and processed meat consumption possibly increased cancer risk. For colorectal cancer, a review of the literature determined that there is convincing scientific evidence that red meat increased cancer risk and that processed meat, saturated/animal fat, and heavily cooked meat were also convincing of increased risk.5
I don't think that's the only reason. There are other issues as well, such as what may cause inflammation and, this is key, spikes in blood sugar. Also, what you've posted is in relation to risk factors, not what is done once you've been diagnosed.
From what I remember in 'teaming with microbes' soil can handle a certain amount of synthetics without becoming dead. I think large scale industrial farming does kill soil, but that is a whole different thing compared to small scale farming with synthetics.
I just finished 'growing vegetables west of the cascades' and steve solomon is basically saying synthetics don't kill microbes and soil. They deplete humus. As long as you keep adding humus the soil can keep jamming. If you deplete all the humus the soil is dead.
Whatcha guys think? Seems like many of you are on the fence or prefer organics...
It's pretty easy to get to the point where you're killing off soil microbes, in both scenarios, and IIRC in TWM they say numbers over 10% are what's generally accepted.
So, is this guy saying that you can pump all the synthetics you want into the ground, but as long as you keep adding humus (in what form)? You're going to have to mine it (leonardite, not bad, but not ideal) if you're not letting it be naturally built up in the soil (cover cropping does this), again, energy, time and fiscally expensive, especially in relation to just throwing a good mix of cover crops out there and what that can do) the soil will not be taxed to the point of being deficient?
The major problem I have with that tack is, once again, it does not follow one basic tenet, a huge tenet behind the organic movement--soil health. We've depleted our soils to the point where our foods grown on them are literally less nutritious than they were decades ago. Do we
really want that? If so, why? I no longer accept the faulty premise that this is the only way to feed the world, not when
so many organic farms are now outproducing conventional, especially during times of drought.
I wish that Acres had more stuff reposted online, because it's a pain to go to the library, find my hardcopy, find the page(s) and then retype them here. But, in short, ANY compaction on the soil kills micro- and macrobes, closes air spaces in the soil, etc. Add onto that chemical salts that dessicate, etc, and you've killed your soil.
Hold on, IIRC Acres offers a free sample copy for folks to try out, lemme do some searching here.
Pick this up, it will pretty much completely change your view. What I read here on the boards usually comes long after it's already been worked out in agriculture. For example, the notion of 'true living organics' (aka soil food web)--already done long ago before The Rev. He's tweaked it and adjusted it specifically for cannabis cultivation, which is what we don't see in mags like Acres. The thing is, cannabis is a green plant much like many other plants on this earth that we grow. It has its preferred conditions, but they're not, environmentally speaking, outside the realm of any other plant on this earth.
