“The ultimate goal of farming is not the growing of crops, but the cultivation and perfection of human beings.”
— Masanobu Fukuoka One-Straw Revolution
Through a series of coincidences and generosity, I am attending an international conference hosted by an agricultural nutrition company in Lexington, KY.
Some themes I’m noticing around this year’s theme … sustainability and economic recovery, the trend of moving away from inorganic minerals, new nutrient supplements that appear biologically inspired, e.g. stimulating the Vitamin E recycling pathway rather than adding expensive Vitamin E to the diet, fertilizer derived from yeast, minerals in biologically available forms. A lot of buzz about selenium. The focus on “natural” creates an excited stir alongside absolute skepticism in the attendees. I think I may have a unique perspective, being an outsider to agribusiness. The voices of small rural farmers with less than 50 acres, with mechanization appropriate to their scale, and some using biodynamic practices where one system feeds another on the farm, echo in me and react to what I learn.
Many of these developments are being aided by new nutrigenomics technology (yep, had to add that one to my spell check dictionary), which is way cool. Imagine a computer chip that reads which genes are turned “on” or “off.” It allows you to see the effects of nutrition on the body real-time, based on what the DNA is up to: making insulin? Stress hormones? Digestive enzymes? Etc. Big Brother would have a field day, but I see a critical benefit here. It’s clear from these sessions that our food is produced from nutritionally fortified feed, which more often than not means heavy metal and PCB accumulation. Nutrigenomics is speeding up the ability to quantify and prove the effects of modern diets, as well as test these new biologically-inspired products. Algae, yeast, etc. Here’s to hoping someone tests organic diets using nutrogenomics.
Some background: traditionally, as in most nutritional fortification in place today, essential minerals are added to feed from a stock of say, zinc or copper. A lot of this is derived from recycling, which is great! Only in melting away whatever it’s coated in, say plastic tubing, PCB’s are generated and end up in the animal. (For the record, this company measures contamination and sends back what doesn’t meet purity standards.) So it’s better to use minerals directly mined from the earth, right? Well, simply using clay as filler or anti-caking agent in chicken feed, for instance, introduces volcanically-originated dioxins.
Since I’m not a nutrition scientist or biochemist, and I’m not an employee, I don’t know the ins and outs of these next-generation supplement products. I really want to understand in detail how they are derived, and what they do in the body of the animal and the consumer. I am optimistic that it’s a step in the best direction, and I can comment on the direction I hope this research ultimately goes. Agricultural feed generally lacks leafy plant material, as seed material is more energy-dense. I suspect nutritional balance lies in capturing the minerals and chemicals green material provides. Plants extract these things and put it in a biologically available form, and even render toxic substances inert…I hope the goal of this research is to reproduce that. I’ve long believed algae is extremely promising, being fast-growing and energy-dense, and biologically similar to leafy plant material. I was very excited to hear a new algae plant announced; it should open this year.
Agriculture reinvents the wheel: it researches what works in nature and gets it to work at a much higher density. This type of science-based agricultural nutrition reinvents the metabolic process not only of the animals but of the plant matter that feeds them. It takes an extremely objective viewpoint to see both sides of this fact: the ability to feed more people more food, and inherent unforseeable effects of our imperfect reinvention of nature.
A speaker in the opening plenary session pointed out that Earth doubled its food production in the past 30-40 years, and needs to double it again in the next 30-40. He identified small, poor, rural farmers around the world as having the greatest opportunity for improvement, and argued that in helping them the distribution of food increases where it’s needed most. He then said rather than helping them become better sustenance farmers, the powers that be should attempt to convert them to commercial farmers. Two things go through my mind. One, the Mobile Processing Unit and small chicken farming system some friends of mine in Old Fort, NC brought to the area. With grant money, they built a mobile, rentable chicken processing trailer that allowed some elderly farmers and landowners to enter the Asheville chicken market for the first time, or re-enter after decades. That to me is cool. Then I think of the dangers of technological “missionaries” to foreign cultures and economies. The gentlest giant has a heavy, heavy hand.
Also awesome: this company is building a sustainable agricultural mini village center in Haiti, intended as a model in revitalizing rural economies in poor countries. I think this could be done really well. It reminds me a lot of the work IPÊ does in the Pontal de Paranapanema with resettled landless workers…how they set up tree nurseries and trained locals in biology and business, and also created a market for the trees through reforestation and shade-grown coffee operations.
There is wisdom in science, and wisdom in intuition and empirical experience. On the ground (so to speak!) are farmers who rely on intuition and empirical experience…and increasingly, they trust science to provide seeds, feeds and fertilizers. Agribusiness relies on science to maximize production while keeping food safe and nutritious. Perhaps science can trust the empirical wisdom of crowds for inspiration. This may be farmers, or it could be someone unexpected. In the developed world, you’d be amazed the types of education people have before deciding to be a farmer. I’ve met engineers and bankers, botanists and professors who’ve switched careers. It’s a good place to be, and there’s plenty of food for thought!