The Green Revolution refers to the dramatic increase in the production of food calories occurring with the following developments I) selective breeding of high yielding crops, which also display added resistance to common diseases; ii) widespread use of fertilizers and pesticides; iii) mechanization of crop harvesting. Beginning in the 1940’s, the Green Revolution successfully overcame the evolving famines in many developing countries and has allowed for major population increases worldwide.
Large scale industrial farming has greatly reduced the cost of food production leading to shared economic benefits to consumers and major corporations. Scientific progress in genetic engineering, along with targeted investments by industry, has further enhanced crop productivity through the use of genetically modified organisms (GMO). The main use of GMO has been to provide food crops with resistance to toxic chemicals, which can then be used to prevent the growth of competing weeds. These toxic chemicals (pesticides) are liberally applied to the crop fields, up to the time that some of the weeds acquire the same protective genes. The food crops then require further genetic modification to resist newer pesticides to which the weeds are susceptible, at least for a period of time. Another government allowed use of GMO has been to restrict the viability of the seeds produced by the “proprietary” crops. The widespread contamination of all farmlands with the toxic pesticides places a competitive disadvantage to organic farming, yet a decision to use GMO modified seeds creates a dependency on industry and the risk of perpetual financial abuse.
Not only can there be widespread pesticide contamination of other farmlands, but traces of the toxins can soon appear in grazing animals, domestic animals and humans. It is especially troublesome that pesticides can now be readily detected in cord blood of newborn infants as well as in municipal drinking water.
The use of fertilizers also has a downside in that the only relevant criterion of success is the overall productivity in terms of calories. In addition to the nutrients that are essential for growth, many plant species will under natural conditions produce secondary metabolites of no apparent major benefit to the plant, but of significant benefit to animals and humans. Various vitamins and a diverse array of trace minerals fit into this category. Their levels in plants grown in heavily fertilized soils are significantly lower than in organically grown crops. The consequence of many foods being deficient in various micronutrients has not been realistically addressed either by industry or the government.
While contributing to a non-healthful environment, farming has also been harmed by industrial pollution from mining, manufacturing and waste disposal. Instead of sustaining and promoting plant growth, some sources of irrigation water are now seen as the cause of stunted growth. Relatively large quantities of toxic water are now sequestered as being forever useless for irrigation.
For progress to occur, the inadvertent practices that are leading to non-sustainable agriculture have to be replaced with a more reasoned and sensible approach. The following three areas are of up most importance. I) Reduce the use of pesticides and instead rely upon the natural interplay of competing living organisms to devise non-toxic methods for favoring the growth of food crops. ii) Reduce the use of nutrient restricted fertilizers and ensure the availability in the soils of a complete array of micronutrients and trace minerals. iii) Increase the kinetic activity of the water used to support plant growth and apply the same principle of water activation to help decontaminate currently unusable water supplies. Each approach will be briefly outlined:
1. The web of life comprises interactive dependencies and competitions among various organisms. Diminished food production can result from the excessive growth of particular microorganisms that are able to cause direct damage to a food crop or of competing plants, such as weeds, that can outperform the food crop. The answer to both issues is to understand the biology and natural predators of the offending species. Efforts can then be devised to lower the relative performance of these natural predators so that the competitive advantage returns to the food crop. An underlying principle is that the advantage will go to whichever species has the better alternative cellular energy (ACE) pathway, since this pathway appears to provide a somewhat universal defense against many pathogens. The ACE pathway is expressed as a dynamic activity of the water within and bathing living cells. The dynamic activity is defined as KELEA (kinetic energy limiting electrostatic attraction). It can be imparted to crops through the use of KELEA activated water or potentially attracted directly into the plant from the environment. The feasibility of the first approach with rice and sugarcane has been demonstrated and published, while beginning efforts are underway on developing the second approach.
2. Replenishing over-fertilized fields with trace minerals and with chemicals required for micronutrients can be accomplished using varied products such as humic/fulvic acids, and diverse natural vegetation, not currently grown with fertilizers, respectively. The possibility of using Kudzu as a source of latter is worthy of consideration.
3. The usefulness of KELEA activated water to enhance the productivity of food crops extends well beyond the issue of increase defense against infectious agents. KELEA adds to overall productivity of the plants, including in some cases delayed senescence. It can also greatly extend the shelf life of harvested plants. The other potential benefit of KELEA activation of water is that it loosens intermolecular hydrogen bonding leading to the detachment of many toxic chemicals from water molecules so that the chemicals can be more easily removed.
Methods of KELEA activation of water and plants are being actively pursued to determine those that are the most suitable for various applications. Essentially, the methods are inexpensive and relatively easy to apply, even in large-scale settings. The endeavor runs counter to the vested interests of the manufacturers of fertilizers, pesticides and GMO crops. It is also inappropriate for the endeavor to be restricted by commercial entities, wishing to profit from an urgent humanitarian need. The enormity of the scope is beyond that of a single philanthropic organization. Yet sharing responsibility for a common project is of little interest to these organizations, since they rely on unique topics to exclusively attract dedicated donors. The source of funding to implement these studies needs to be freshly printed from the Federal Reserve, essentially being a capital tax on the currency.