Re: Is soil fertility off-topic?

[Guest guest]

--- In @y..., " Kris " <kris.johnson@a...>

wrote:

> Chi,

> I've been thinking about your reply. Soil fertility comes from

> adequate minerals - the full range of macro and micro nutrients,

> but without the microorganisms in the soil the minerals

> are not very available, so organic matter is also essential,

> and the worms contribute to turning organic matter

> deposited on the soil into humus in the soil.

>

> But this is off-topic, so enough said, I guess.

Hi Kris:

When it comes to nutrition, Weston Price did not think soil fertility

was off-topic, he thought it was a critical aspect of nutrition.

You are right that soil fertility comes from minerals. The basic rock

that forms the soil determines what minerals are in the soil and in

what ratios to become available. The soil fertility is limited by

these minerals and varies from low to high according to the minerals

that become available. Albrecht explains that in a forest, calcium is

always in short supply, making forest soils low fertility. Out west,

however, where the buffalo roamed, calcium was plentiful in the soil

and the soil fertility was much higher than in forested areas.

Organic matter does not make fertile soil if it is not a product of

fertile soil. Organic matter is a product of the basic minerals in

the soil and so it varies in its ability to contribute to soil

fertility. It seems that most organic gardeners don't realize that

adding organic matter to a garden may do a little or a lot according

to the soil fertility that produced the organic matter being added.

Worms can't change organic matter from low fertility soil to high

fertility humus.

Chi

[Guest guest]

> If anyone is interested in the work of Louis Kevran and his

> book " Biological Transmutations " , it might answer a

> lot of questions. He demonstrated that, for instance,

> Oak trees growing in poor quality, sandy soils (low in calcium)

> still had high calcium levels in the bark, leaves etc, and

> that where the trees had been growing for a while, the soil

> immediatly near them was higher in calcium than say an area

> outside of its rootzone. Dandelion, amongst other plants,

> sems to have a similar abilty, hence the reason many books

> have been written regarding 'weeds' abilty to

> repair damaged soils.

> Many more experiments have been conducted in similar areas,

> so the book is definatly a good read, though its only a

> starting point to a vast subject.

> Ever wondered why herbalists advise the use of horsetail

> and other silica rich, calcium poor herbs for calcium

> deficiencies? Guess what, we can do it too

I have read Kevran's book. I certainly think the biological

transmutation of elements is a possibility. I wouldn't think,

however, that there would be any chance of biological tranmutation of

elements would ever turn low soil fertility into high soil fertility.

Oak trees may create more calcium in their root zone than the

surrounding soil, but certainly not enough to turn that poor soil

into high soil fertility. The reason oak leaves last so long is that

they are poor in calcium content.

I also wouldn't think that any ability we have for biological

tranmutation of elements would make up for a deficient diet. In spite

of the fact that people talk about mineral shortages in foods,

mineral shortages are not the main problem with the foods. The main

problem is lack of organic compounds that we cannot synthesize

whether or not we are capable of biological transformation. One

compound, for example, would be Weston Price's activator X. As Price

explained, without sufficient activator X our bodies cannot fully

utilize minerals such as calcium, whether we can biologically

tranmute silica into calcium or not.

Chi