The Green Revolution refers to a dramatic increase in food calorie production that occurs with the following developments: I] selective breeding of high-yielding crops, which also shows additional resistance to common diseases; ii] widespread use of fertilizers and pesticides; Mechanization of crop harvesting. Since the 1940s, the Green Revolution has successfully overcome the ever-changing famine of many developing countries and has dramatically increased the global population.
Large-scale industrial agriculture has greatly reduced the cost of food production, thus bringing common economic benefits to consumers and large companies. Scientific advances in genetic engineering and targeted investments in industry have further increased crop productivity through the use of genetically modified organisms [GMOs]. The primary use of genetically modified organisms is to provide food crops with resistance to toxic chemicals that can then be used to prevent the growth of competitive weeds. These toxic chemicals [insecticides] can be applied freely to the field until some weeds acquire the same protective gene. The food crop then needs further genetic modification to counter the new pesticides that are suspected of weeds, at least for a while. Another government allows the use of genetically modified organisms to limit the responsibility of seeds for “proprietary” crop production. All farmland is generally contaminated with toxic pesticides, creating a competitive disadvantage for organic agriculture, but the decision to use GM-modified seeds poses a risk of industrial dependence and permanent financial abuse.
Not only pesticide contamination is common in other farmland, but traces of toxins will soon appear on grazing animals, livestock and humans. Insecticides can now be detected in cord blood of newborns and municipal drinking water, which is especially troublesome.
There is also a disadvantage to the use of fertilizers, and the only relevant success criterion is the overall productivity of calories. In addition to the nutrients essential for growth, many plant species produce secondary metabolites under natural conditions that do not have any major cosmetic benefits to plants, but have significant benefits for animals and humans. Various vitamins and various trace minerals fall into this category. Their levels of plants growing in heavily fertilized soils are significantly lower than those of organically grown crops. The consequences of the lack of various micronutrients in many foods have not been realistically addressed by industry or government.
While contributing to an unhealthy environment, agriculture is also hurt by industrial pollution such as mining, manufacturing and waste disposal. Some irrigation water sources are now considered to be the cause of stunting rather than maintaining and promoting plant growth. A relatively large amount of toxic water is now isolated because they are never useful for irrigation.
In order to make progress, unreasonable practices leading to unsustainable agriculture must be replaced by more rational and sensible methods. The following three aspects are the most important. I] Reduce the use of pesticides, but design non-toxic methods that are beneficial to the growth of food crops through the natural interactions of competing organisms. Ii] Reduce the use of nutrient-limited fertilizers and ensure that there is a complete set of micronutrients and trace minerals in the soil. Iii] Increase the kinetic activity of water used to support plant growth and apply the same principles of water activation to help purify water sources that are currently unavailable. Each method will be briefly outlined:
1. The living network compresses the interaction and competition between organizations. Reduced food production may be due to overgrowth of specific microorganisms that can cause direct damage to food crops or competing plants [such as weeds], which may exceed food crops. The answer to these two questions is to understand the biology and natural enemies of harmful species. Efforts can then be reduced to reduce the relative performance of these natural predators, thereby returning competitive advantage to food crops. One emphasized principle is that whispering species have a better alternative to cellular energy [ACE] pathway because this pathway appears to provide some general defense for many pathogens. The ACE pathway is expressed as the dynamic activity of water in water and bathing living cells. Dynamic activity is defined as KELEA [kinetic energy limits electrostatic attraction]. It can be attributed to crops that use KELEA to activate water or may be directly attracted to plants from the environment. The feasibility of using the first method for rice and sugar cane has been demonstrated and published, and the development of the second method has begun.
2. Using a variety of products [such as humic acid / fulvic acid] and a variety of natural vegetation [currently not using fertilizers], you can supplement the over-fertilized fields with trace elements to supplement the chemicals needed for trace elements and micronutrients. The possibility of using Pueraria as the source of the latter is worth considering.
3. The role of KELEA activated water in increasing the productivity of food crops far exceeds the problem of increasing the number of defense factors. KELEA increases the overall productivity of plants, including delaying aging in some cases. It can also greatly extend the shelf life of harvested plants. Another potential benefit of KELEA activated water is its loose intermolecular hydrogen bonding, which causes many toxic chemicals to separate from water molecules, making it easier to remove chemicals.
KELEA is actively seeking ways to activate water and plants to determine the most suitable method for various applications. Basically, even in large-scale settings, these methods are inexpensive and reliable to apply. Appetite drives the vested interests of fertilizers, pesticides and GM crop manufacturers. It is also inappropriate for such efforts to be limited by commercial entities, hoping to profit from urgent humanitarian needs. The advantages of the scope are beyond the scope of a single charity. However, for these organizations, the responsibility of sharing common projects is not important, as they attract very dedicated donors on unique themes. The source of funding for implementing these studies needs to be printed from the Fed, which is basically a capital tax on the currency.Ultimate Cleaning Business Package, Click here!