Regenerative Farming Is Vital to Ensure Food Security

The past year has shown us the importance of health as the world battles the Covid-19 pandemic. But, it is crucial to also not forget the health of our planet which is in crisis caused by climate change and the collapse of biodiversity as a result of exploitation of our natural resources.

One of the major culprits regardinging biodiversity loss is the agricultural industry. The production of food erodes soil, damages the natural environment and is responsible for 24% of greenhouse gas emissions, according to the Regenerative Agriculture Association of South Africa.

Globally, more than a quarter of the carbon emissions that contribute to climate change come from growing and processing food. Considering that the United Nations predicts the population to increase to 9.7-billion in 2050 from 7.9-billion currently, it is vital that farming practices change, otherwise feeding the world in 30 years will require an 87%  increase in carbon emissions.

Climate change is already wreaking havoc, which also affects the agricultural industry.


Bill Gates: Let Them Eat Fake Meat!

EDITOR’S NOTE: Below is an excerpt from “Bill Gates & His Fake Solutions to Climate  Change,” a 23-page report coordinated by Navdanya International which sheds light on the dangers of philanthrocapitalism.

One of [Bill] Gates’ most recent promotions is his prescriptions of synthetic foods for developed countries as a means to combat climate change. In a recent interview with MIT Technology Review, Gates says he thinks “all rich countries should move to 100% synthetic beef.”

Fake food replaces animal products with highly processed food grown in labs, like fake meat, fake dairy products or fake eggs. It is made possible by technical innovations such as synthetic biology, which involves reconfiguring the DNA of an organism to create something entirely new.

For instance, plant-based meat companies like Beyond Meat and Impossible Foods use a DNA coding sequence from soybeans or peas to create a product that looks and tastes like real meat. Some companies are also investing in cell-based meat, grown from real animal cells, but it has yet to reach the market.


Tree-range Chickens: How Raising Poultry in the Woods of B.C. Could Improve Food Security for Some Communities

Raising chickens in the woods is being touted as a way to help improve the food security of First Nation communities by providing an alternative to dwindling supplies of traditional foods such as moose and salmon.

The Regenerative Poultry Project has already produced 1,500 chickens on a small farm about 150 kilometres northwest of Terrace, B.C., using techniques developed in Guatemala.

The idea is that the chickens are allowed to roam the woods, roosting in trees and foraging for food, mimicking the behaviours of their wild ancestors.

“Chickens actually evolved as a jungle species,” said Kesia Nagata of the non-profit Skeena Watershed Conservation Coalition, which is helping run the project.

“They feel happiest when covered with a canopy that they can range under. They like to forage for their food, they like to scratch under trees and they like to roost and explore with the protection of a canopy over them.”

The birds aren’t completely on their own, though. They live on the property of Nathan Coombs, a Gitxsan farmer who runs Skeena Valley Farm and cares for the chickens.


One Empire Over Seed: Control Over the World’s Seed Banks

Since the onset of the Neolithic Revolution some 10.000 years ago, farmers and communities have worked to improve yield, taste, nutritional and other qualities of seeds. They have expanded and passed on knowledge about health impacts and healing properties of plants as well as about the peculiar growing habits of plants and interaction with other plants and animals, soil and water. The free exchange of seed among farmers has been the basis to maintaining biodiversity and food security.

A great seed and biodiversity piracy is underway, not just by corporations — which through mergers are becoming fewer and larger— but also by super rich billionaires whose wealth and power open doors to their every whim. Leading the way is Microsoft mogul, Bill Gates.

When the Green Revolution was brought into India and Mexico, farmers’ seeds were “rounded-up” from their fields and locked in international institutions, to be used to breed green revolution varieties engineered to respond to chemical inputs.1

The International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) in the Philippines and the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Centre (CIMMYT), were the first to roundup the diversity from farmers’ fields and replace it with chemical monocultures of rice, wheat, and corn. Others quickly followed.

This hijacking of farmers’ seeds is best highlighted with the shameful removal of India’s pre-eminent rice research scientist Dr. R.H. Richaria, as the head of India’s Central Rice Research Institute (CRRI) in Cuttack, Orissa, which housed the largest collection of rice diversity in the world, for refusing to allow the IRRI in the Philippines to pirate the collection out of India. With his removal at the behest of the World Bank, Indian peasant intellectual property was hijacked to the IRRI in the Philippines which later became part of the newly created Consultative Group of International Agriculture Research (CGIAR).2

Farmers’ seed heritage was held in the private seed banks of CGIAR, a consortium of 15 international agricultural research centers, controlled by the World Bank, the Rockefeller and Ford Foundations, as well as of course the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF), which since 2003, has poured more than $720 million into the CGIAR centres. CGIAR gene banks presently manage 768,576 accessions of farmer’ seeds. Taken together, CGIAR gene banks represent the largest and most widely used collections of crop diversity in the world.3

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation operates a bit like the World Bank, using its financial power and prowess to take control of agriculture and influence government and institutional agricultural policies. By far the largest funder of the CGIAR, Gates has successfully accelerated the transfer of research and seeds from scientific research institutions to commodity-based corporations, centralizing and facilitating the pirating of intellectual property and seed monopolies through intellectual property laws and seed regulations.

The urgency with which this restructuring of CGIAR and centralization of control is being done is reflected in the IPES Food open letter of 21 July 2020 as follows: “The process now underway to reform the CGIAR is therefore imperative and of major public interest. The ‘One CGIAR’ process seeks to merge the CGIAR’s 15 legally independent but cooperating centres, headquartered in 15 countries, into one legal entity. The impetus has come from some of its biggest funders, notably the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the World Bank, and the US and UK governments.”4

The aim of “One CGIAR”, overseen by “One CGIAR Common Board’ is to merge it to become part of “One Agriculture”, aka “Gates Ag One” – Gates’ latest move in controlling the world’s seed supply.5 Gates has indicated he will more than double the CGIAR present budget, from $850 million to $2 billion a year.

Despite the long-recognized failure of the Green Revolution in India and Mexico, in 2006 Gates launched AGRA, the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa. The folly of imposing this failed technology in Africa is well documented in the two following articles by Nicoletta Dentico and Tim Wise.

The Seed Freedom movement has been calling for the CGIAR gene banks to return these stolen farmers varieties back to the farmers. The lessons of the Green Revolution since the 1960’s have shown us that the chemical path of monocultures has undermined Earth’s capacity to support life and food production by destroying biodiversity, soil and water67 as well as contributing to climate change.8 It has dispossessed small farmers through debt for external inputs. And it has undermined food and nutritional security.9 The experience of the last half century has made clear that Seed Sovereignty, Food Sovereignty and Knowledge Sovereignty is the only viable future of food and farming.

Besides taking control of the seeds of farmers in the CGIAR seed banks, Gates (along with the Rockefeller Foundation) is investing heavily in collecting seeds from across the world and storing them in the Svalbard Global Seed Vault in the Arctic archipelago – aka the Doomsday Vault – created to collect and hold a global collection of the world’s seeds. It is in association with the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) and the Crop Trust.10

The Crop Trust, based in Germany, funds and coordinates the Svalbard Seed Vault. In addition to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, its funders include the Poison Cartel adherents CropLife Dupont/ Pioneer Hi-bred, KWS SAAT AG, and Syngent AG.

The largest numbers of accessions stored in the Seed Vault are varieties of rice, wheat, and barley crops; more than 150,000 samples of wheat and rice, and close to 80,000 samples of Barley. Other well represented crops are sorghum, phaseolus bean species, maize, cowpea, soybean, kikuyu grass and chickpea.

Crops such as potatoes, peanuts, cajanus beans, oats and rye, alfalfa, the cereal hybrid Triticosecale and Brassica’s are represented by between 10,000 and 20,000 seed samples.11


Australia 20,165,706
Bundesverband Deutscher Planzenzuechter 25,735
CropLife International 43,726
Czech Republic 40,000
Dupont/ Pioneer  Hi-bred 2,000,000
Egypt 25,000
Ethiopia 25,000
Gates Foundation/UN Foundation 8,003,118
Germany 50,726,348
India 456,391
International Seed Federation 80,785
Ireland 4,144,250
KWS SAAT AG 35,589
Norway 31,491,161
Netherlands 489,000
New Zealand 1,453,800
Republic of Korea 442,556
Slovak Republic 20,000
Spain 2,629,650
Sweden 11,886,620
Switzerland 10,992,704
Syngenta AG 1,000,000
United Kingdom 19,468,582
United States – before Farm Bill 42,825,073
United States – US Farm Bill* 11,585,120
Sub Total 220,055,915
Concessional Loan ** 59,055,611
Sub Total 59,055,611
Grand Total 279,105,526

Source: ‘Our Donors’. Crop Trust,

It should come as no surprise that Gates is also funding Diversity Seek (DivSeek), a global project launched in 2015 to map the genetic data of the peasant diversity of seeds held in gene banks to then take patents on these seeds through genomic mapping.12 Seven million crop accessions are in public seed banks.

Biopiracy is carried out through the convergence of information technology and biotechnology where patents are taken on seeds through “mapping” their genomes and genome sequences.

While living seed needs to evolve “in situ”, patents on seed genomes can be taken from seed “ex situ. DivSeek is designed to “mine” and extract the data in the seed to “censor” out the commons. In effect it robs the peasants of their seeds and knowledge, it robs the seed of its integrity and diversity, it erases evolutionary history and the seed’s link to the soil, reducing it to a simple “code”. This ‘genetic colonialism’ is an enclosure of the genetic commons.13

The participating institutions in DivSeek are the CGIAR nodes and ‘public’ universities like Cornell and Iowa State, which are being increasingly privatized by the biotechnology industry as well as the Gates Foundation. BMGF funds Cornell’s Alliance for Science, the corporate worlds’ pseudo-science propaganda outlet while Iowa State is the institution promoting the unethical human feeding trials of GMO bananas. Other Gates-funded DivSeek partners are the African Agricultural Technology Foundation and Africa-Brazil Agricultural Innovation Marketplace developed by the Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation (Embrapa).14

Through a new ‘front’ corporation, Editas Medicine,15 BMGF is investing in a one-year-old experimental genetic engineering tool for gene editing, CRISPR-Cas9. Though the technology itself is immature and inaccurate, it has become a gold rush for new patents. The language of “gene editing” and “educated guesses” is creeping into scientific discourse.

Piracy of common genomic data of millions of plants bred by peasants is termed “big data”. Big data however is not knowledge, it is not even information. It is ‘privateered’ data, pirated and privatised.

Seeds are not just germplasm. They are living, self-organizing entities, subjects of evolution, history, culture, and relationships.

In the 1980s, Monsanto led the push for GMOs and patents on seed and life. Today the flag bearer is Bill Gates. In a nutshell: one billionaire given free access to use his wealth to bypass all international treaties and multilateral governance structures to help global corporations highjack the biodiversity and wealth of peasants by financing unscientific and undemocratic processes such as DivSeek, and to unleash untested technologies such as the CRISPR technology on humanity.

Over the last two decades, thousands of concerned citizens and organizations have taken action and written laws to protect the biodiversity of the planet and the rights of farmers to seed, and the rights of consumers to safety, among them, the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD); the Cartagena Biosafety Protocol to the CBD; and the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources Treaty for Food and Agriculture (ITPGRFA).

This article is extracted from Navdanya International Global Citizens’ Report “Gates to a Global Empire“, which was presented on October 14th, 2020, through an online event with the authors. The report gathers evidence and throws light on the dangers of philanthrocapitalism, which is boosting the corporate takeover of our seed, agriculture, food, knowledge and global health systems, manipulating information and eroding our democracies. Contributors to the Seed and Biopiracy sections  outline how Bill Gates and his foundation routinely undermine international treaties created to protect biodiversity, farmers rights, and the sovereignty of countries and communities of their seed and biodiversity wealth.

1 Shiva, V. (1991). The Violence of the Green Revolution: Third World Agriculture, Ecology, and Politics. Other India Press.

2 Alvares, Claude. “The Great Gene Robbery.” Vijayvaani.Com, January 13, 2012.

3 “CGIAR Genebank Platform.” CGIAR.

4 IPES food. “OPEN LETTER | ‘One CGIAR’ with Two Tiers of Influence?”, July 21, 2020.

5 Shiva, V., Anilkumar, P., & Ahluwalia, U. (2020). Ag one: Recolonisation of agriculture. Navdanya/RFSTE.

6 IPBES. “UN Report: Nature’s Dangerous Decline ‘Unprecedented’; Species Extinction Rates ‘Accelerating.’” UN | Sustainable Development, May 6, 2019.

7 FAO Commission on Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture. “The State of the World’s Biodiversity for Food and Agriculture 2019,” 2019.

8 “Land Is a Critical Resource, IPCC Report Says”. IPCC, August 8, 2019.

9 El Hage Scialabba, Nadia. “Feeding the Word: Delusion, False Promises and Attacks of Industrial Agriculture.” Navdanya International, December 7, 2019.

10 “India Deposit to the Svalbard Global Seed Vault.” Crop Trust, May 15, 2014.

11 Mooney, Chris. “Why the World Is Storing so Many Seeds in a ‘Doomsday’ Vault.” Washington Post, April 15, 2016.

12 “Two contributions to an integrated, global, accession-level information system for ex situ conservation” | Input Paper to the ITPGRFA Consultation on the Global Information System on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (COGIS-PGRFA) Provided by: The Global Crop Diversity Trust. January 2015. IT/COGIS-1/15/Inf.4.a5.

13 “‘DivSeek Initiative’ Loses Support of the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture.” International Planning Committee for Food Sovereignty (IPC), February 28, 2017.

14 Shiva, V., & Shiva, K. (2020). Oneness Vs. The 1 Percent: Shattering Illusions, Seeding Freedom. CHELSEA GREEN PUB.

15 Herper, Matthew. “Bill Gates And 13 Other Investors Pour $120 Million Into Revolutionary Gene-Editing Startup.” Forbes, August 10, 2015. Accessed September 8, 2020.

The Importance of a Regenerative Food System for Sustainable Agriculture

A regenerative food system focuses on feeding humanity without depleting the Earth. It is a holistic systems approach, stressing the importance of finding solutions that address problems collectively.

There is no single definition of regenerative agriculture, but most people agree that regenerative farming includes things such as no-till farming, cover crops, perennial and native plants, integrated livestock and crop diversity. Building a regenerative food system is vital to feeding humanity while also repairing damaged ecosystems. In the face of climate change, a regenerative food system will create resiliency by localizing economies, sequestering carbon and building greater food security.

Carbon Sequestration

One of the main benefits of a regenerative food system is the ability to sequester carbon. Agriculture is a top contributor to greenhouse gas emissions, and industrialized agriculture has a serious carbon footprint. Soil erosion and nutrient depletion are also two common side effects of conventional agriculture.

Utilizing techniques such as cover crops and no-till growing help sequester carbon, keeping carbon in the soil instead of releasing it into the atmosphere.


In Nebraska, He’s Working to Break up Meat Monopolies

While most of us have recently witnessed empty shelves and higher price tags from the aisles of our local supermarkets, 2019 Fixer Graham Christensen has been fighting for solutions to our fractured food system from the fields. A fifth-generation farmer, Christensen founded the consulting company GC Resolve to help his home state of Nebraska establish more ethical and sustainable agricultural practices.

According to Christensen, corporate greed is to blame for major meatpacking-plant shutdowns — brought on by a surge of coronavirus cases among workers — that have led to nationwide shortages of pork and poultry. That greed is also to blame for the livestock sector’s emissions problem. “Under industrial control, under a plantation-economic scheme, there’s no way we can draw down carbon in enough time for the next generations,” Christensen says.

The antidote? Localized, independent, and resilient supply chains, for meat and more. To help promote these models, GC Resolve joined PReP Rural, a research-based pandemic response coalition that recently released a list of six policy-oriented action items to protect essential workers; support young, diverse farmers; and make climate-friendly livestock rearing the standard — all while keeping food on America’s tables.


Planet Watch: Regenerative Agriculture as One Answer to Planetary Crisis

Over the last few decades, modern industrialised agriculture has wrought havoc on natural systems. It has razed forests, decimated biodiversity, and has done immense damage to soils. Most individual farmers may just want to turn a profit to feed their families and pay off their mortgages, but collectively, if you look at what’s happening around the world, this form of agriculture is a major contributor to the ongoing degradation of our planet.

A primary impact of agriculture is soil degradation. Land-clearing, overgrazing, the impact of heavy farming equipment, chemical fertilisers and pesticides, and irrigation, all contribute to soil degradation. This has resulted in the degradation of one-third of the world’s soils:

  • 30 per cent of the world’s cropland has been abandoned over the past 40 years due to degradation and desertification,
  • 52 per cent of the land used for agriculture is moderately to severely affected by soil degradation.
  • 12 million hectares of cropland are lost per year (23 hectares per minute)


How Colombia’s Small Farmers Contribute to Resilience and Food Sovereignty in Post-Conflict and COVID-19 Pandemic Times

By Ana Prada

BOGOTA, COLOMBIA – In his book, “Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed“, Jared Diamond analyzes why certain societies prevail and others collapse, and explains how the decline of some, such as the Mayan and the Easter Island civilizations, resulted from the  mismanagement of nature. 

Indeed, the way societies manage their natural resources largely defines their future, according to Diamond.  The abundance of resources and successful adaptation to climate change, together with the correct decision-making by a society’s leaders, are some of the factors that determine a society’s ability to survive over time.

Conversely, the abuse of environmental resources and exploitative agricultural production systems can lead a society to collapse.

Socio-environmental conflicts are not foreign to the Colombian reality. The unequal distribution of land and territory has given rise to Colombian armed conflict. The socio-environmental confrontations in Colombia date back to the time of the Spanish conquest.  However, the trigger for the armed conflict occurred in 1948, with the assassination of political leader Jorge Eliécer Gaitán. 

In 1948, the country was ruled by conservatives and landowners, and was totally polarized between extreme poverty and wealth. Thus, one of the longest-running armed conflicts in recent world history was born. It was not until 2016 that the Peace Agreements were signed between the National Government and the extinct guerrilla of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC).

Initially, the guerrillas were driven by political ideals. But later, toward the end of the 1970s, with the arrival and subsequent consolidation of drug trafficking, the conflict became a business matter. The search for concentration of land by the various sides left the Colombian small farmers in the middle, and on the losing end. 

Yet despite being politically marginalized, culturally undervalued and economically excluded, and despite experiencing greater difficulty accessing land than any other social group in the country, small farmers, who represent 30 percent of the country’s total population, produce 70 percent of the food consumed in the country. 

In addition, this disadvantaged but industrious population reminds those of us who live in cities of the value of having roots in our land and territory, and cherishing our identity.

Small-scale agriculture has taught Colombians about resilience and innovation. On less than one hectare, small farmers manage to feed themselves, create surpluses to sell and learn about the diverse Colombian soils and ecosystems through trial and error.  And despite being displaced because of the armed conflict, it has been small farmers who have opened the agricultural border in the country, and started their lives from scratch, in the country with the greatest internal displacement in the world—worse even than Syria.

In the value chains of the drug trafficking industry, small farmers have become the first link. Indeed, it is the most vulnerable link in a chain characterized by the predominance of activities that leave Colombia with nothing but social burdens: land concentration, idle lands ownership, diminished productivity and at-risk national food sovereignty and autonomy.

In the Peace Agreements, small farmers are recognized as victims of the armed conflict. A political framework to reduce the gaps between the countryside and the city was designed, guaranteeing the small farmers the right to political and economic participation and decision-making regarding the future of their territories. 

In points 1 and 4 of the Peace Agreements, Comprehensive Rural Reform and Comprehensive Solution to the Drug Problem respectively, multiple political and legal instruments were created. These include the land fund for Comprehensive Rural Reform, the multipurpose cadaster; Development Plans with a Territorial Approach; and Comprehensive Nations Plans for Substitution, among others. 

Although the implementation of these political and legal instruments has been slow, they have become novel tools to rethink small farmers as a strategic actor in the territorial planning to restore peace, the conservation of the territories and the guarantee of security, sovereignty and food autonomy.

In 2013, there was a national agrarian strike in Colombia, supported by the main farmers’ organizations, as well as workers from other areas, which over time managed to get the recognition of the citizens. Since then, Colombians who live in cities have shown growing empathy towards the small farmers’ movement, appreciating the producers of the food they have on their plates daily, as well as the need to rethink and re-territorialize cities to stop the growing trend of food deserts, which put at risk the right to food, especially for the most vulnerable. These transformations have become more necessary than ever in the context of the COVID-19 crisis.

This is a country whose rulers have lacked the gallantry to guarantee its citizens the right to food, and to preserve the country’s rich biocultural diversity. They have succumbed to globalization and progress in the short term, at the expense of resources that give us life. 

In these days of covid-19, we ​​have witnessed two trends that are two sides of the same coin.

On the one hand, we see citizens who increasingly demand healthy, local and sustainable food, and who are more willing to consume food from small farmers, family and community agriculture. 

On the other hand, small farmers continue to face the traditional challenges of the agricultural Colombia: the appalling road and telecommunications infrastructure, the persistence of the armed conflict, the murder of social leaders, insufficient healthcare system that increases the risk of infection and death due to the epidemic, price speculation and misinformation, among many other challenges.

Despite these challenges, there are reasons to be hopeful. For instance, the creation and strengthening of collaborative networks between the territories, the building of close relationships between producers and consumers, the possibility of resuming peace dialogues between the National Government and the guerrilla of the National Liberation Army (ELN), the use of information and communication technologies to facilitate food distribution and the consolidation of small farmers and/or agro-ecological markets as viable and secure supply alternatives, even in times of epidemic.

The reader may be wondering, how can I put my grain of sand? It is very simple, buy local! Buy from small farmers, family and community agriculture! Go back to the farmers markets, go to meet the producer so you give him your vote of confidence to stay in the territory feeding hope to the country.

In Colombia, The National Network of Family Farming (RENAF) leads the national campaign “Yo llevo el campo Colombiano (I carry the Colombian countryside) that seeks to make visible the farmers markets that exist throughout the country.

By eating local and seasonal food lime the uchuva or the curuba, and supporting the small farmers, Colombians can put their grain of sand in the construction of peace in Colombia.

About 3Colibrís

We are an organization that contributes to the strengthening of marketing and logistics of products from small farmers, family and community and/or agroecological agriculture in Latin America. We work for the construction of sustainable farming that’s connected to the cities in Colombia and Latin America. We seek out and involve producers of healthy food and agro-ecological products so consumers have easier access to these foods. We visit and guide food producers to improve their marketing channels and ensure that we work with ethical and responsible organizations.

Ana Prada is the founder of 3Colibrís and a business administrator and sociologist from the Javeriana University of Bogotá, apprentice for the International Training in Dialogue and Mediation at the University of Uppsala and the International Course on Food Systems at the University of Wageningen. She has worked for Colombian Caritas in the implementation of “Article One” of the Peace Agreements, and on projects for UNDP, UNFAO, EU and the Suyusama Foundation. 

To keep up with Regeneration International news, sign up for our newsletter.

$1M a Minute: The Farming Subsidies Destroying the World – Report

The public is providing more than $1m per minute in global farm subsidies, much of which is driving the climate crisis and destruction of wildlife, according to a new report.

Just 1% of the $700bn (£560bn) a year given to farmers is used to benefit the environment, the analysis found. Much of the total instead promotes high-emission cattle production, forest destruction and pollution from the overuse of fertiliser.

The security of humanity is at risk without reform to these subsidies, a big reduction in meat eating in rich nations and other damaging uses of land, the report says. But redirecting the subsidies to storing carbon in soil, producing healthier food, cutting waste and growing trees is a huge opportunity, it says.

The report rejects the idea that subsidies are needed to supply cheap food. It found that the cost of the damage currently caused by agriculture is greater than the value of the food produced. New assessments in the report found producing healthy, sustainable food would actually cut food prices, as the condition of the land improves.


Comida falsa, carne falsa: el intento desesperado de las grandes corporaciones alimentarias para intensificar la industrialización de nuestra comida

Traducido por Carlo Voli 

La ontología y ecología de la comida.

La comida no es una mercancía, no es una “cosa” ensamblada mecánica y artificialmente en laboratorios y fábricas. La comida es vida. La comida contiene el aporte de todos los seres que componen la red alimenticia, y tiene el potencial de mantener y regenerar la red de la vida. La comida también tiene el potencial para la salud y la enfermedad, dependiendo de cómo se cultivó y procesó. La comida es, por tanto, la moneda viva de la red de la vida.

Como un antiguo Upanishad nos recuerda: “Todo es comida, todo es comida de otra cosa”. “

La buena comida y la comida real son la base de la salud.

La mala comida, la comida industrial y la comida falsa son la base de la enfermedad.

Hipócrates dijo: “Deja que la comida sea tu medicina”. En Ayurveda, la antigua ciencia de la vida de la India, a la comida se la llama “sarvausadha”, la medicina que cura todas las enfermedades.

Los sistemas alimentarios industriales han reducido la comida a una mera mercancía, a “cosas” que luego pueden constituirse en el laboratorio. En el proceso tanto la salud del planeta como nuestra salud han sido casi destruidas.

El 75% de la destrucción planetaria del suelo, el agua, la biodiversidad y el 50% de las emisiones de gases de efecto invernadero provienen de la agricultura industrial, que también contribuye al 75% de las enfermedades crónicas relacionadas con los alimentos. Es culpable del 50% de los gases de efecto invernadero responsables del cambio climático. La agricultura química no devuelve la materia orgánica y la fertilidad al suelo. En cambio, está contribuyendo a la desertificación y la degradación de la tierra. También requiere de más agua, ya que destruye la capacidad natural de retención de agua del suelo. Los sistemas alimentarios industriales han destruido la biodiversidad del planeta mediante la difusión de monocultivos y mediante el uso de tóxicos y venenos que están matando a las abejas, mariposas, insectos y aves, causando la sexta extinción masiva.

En cambio, una agricultura llena de biodiversidad y libre de venenos, produce más nutrición por acre y rejuvenece el planeta. Nos muestra el camino hacia el “Hambre Cero” en los tiempos del cambio climático.

El modelo de agricultura industrial y alimentos tóxicos ha sido promovido como la única respuesta a la seguridad económica y alimentaria. Sin embargo, a nivel mundial, más de mil millones de personas padecen hambre. Más de 3 mil millones padecen enfermedades crónicas relacionadas con la alimentación.

La agricultura industrial basada en el uso de combustibles fósiles, los monocultivos y el uso intensivo de químicos utiliza el 75% de la tierra, sin embargo sólo produce el 30% de los alimentos que comemos. Mientras que las granjas pequeñas y biodiversas que utilizan el 25% de la tierra proporcionan el 70% de los alimentos. A este ritmo, si la proporción de la agricultura industrial y los alimentos industriales en nuestra dieta se incrementa al 45%, tendremos un planeta muerto. Uno sin vida ni comida.

La loca fiebre de la comida falsa y la carne falsa, ignorante de la diversidad de nuestros alimentos y culturas alimentarias, y el papel de la biodiversidad en el mantenimiento de nuestra salud, es una receta para acelerar la destrucción del planeta y nuestra salud.

La soya transgénica no es segura  ni para el medio ambiente ni para el consumidor

En un artículo reciente llamado “Cómo nuestro compromiso con los consumidores y nuestro planeta nos llevó a utilizar la soya GM”, Pat Brown, director ejecutivo  y fundador de Impossible Foods afirma que:

“Buscamos la opción más segura y ambientalmente responsable que nos permitiera escalar nuestra producción y ofrecer la Hamburguesa Imposible a un costo razonable a los consumidores”.

Dado que el 90% de las mariposas monarca han desaparecido debido a los cultivos Roundup Ready, y que estamos viviendo lo que los científicos han llamado un “insectageddon”, el uso de la soya OGM no es realmente una “opción ambientalmente responsable”.

Al escribir esto, Pat Brown demuestra su total ignorancia de que las malezas han desarrollado resistencia al Roundup y se han convertido en super malezas que ahora requieren de mayor cantidad de herbicidas letales.

Bill Gates y DARPA incluso están pidiendo que se usen impulsores genéticos para exterminar el amaranto, un alimento sagrado y nutritivo en la India, porque el Amaranthus Palmeri se ha convertido en una súper maleza en los campos de soya Roundup-Ready de los Estados Unidos.

En estos días en el que el movimiento para prohibir los OGM y el Roundup está creciendo en el mundo, la promoción de la soya OGM como “carne falsa” es engañosa para el consumidor tanto en términos de la ontología de la hamburguesa como en las afirmaciones sobre su seguridad.

La “Hamburguesa Imposible” elaborada a base de soya OGM rociada con Roundup no es una opción “segura”, como acaba de anunciar Zen Honeycutt de la organización  “Moms Across America”:

“la Hamburguesa Imposible dio positivo en glifosato”. Los niveles de glifosato detectados en la “Impossible Burger” por los Laboratorios del Instituto de Investigación de la Salud fueron 11 veces más altos que los de la hamburguesa de Beyond Meat. El resultado total (glifosato y la descomposición de AMPA) fue de 11.3 ppb. Moms Across America también probó Beyond Meat Burger y los resultados fueron de 1 ppb.

“Nos sorprende descubrir que los niveles de residuos de glifosato de la hamburguesa imposible pueden ser hasta 11 veces mayores que la hamburguesa Beyond Meat según estas muestras analizadas. Este nuevo producto se está comercializando como una solución para una alimentación “saludable”, cuando en realidad el consumo de 11 ppb de herbicida con glifosato puede ser altamente peligroso. Se ha demostrado que solo 0.1 ppb de glifosato destruye las bacterias intestinales, que es donde se encuentra el bastión del sistema inmunológico. Estoy muy preocupada de que los consumidores estén siendo engañados para creer que la Hamburguesa Imposible es saludable “.

Los recientes procesos judiciales han mostrado la relación entre el Roundup y el cáncer. Con la acumulación de responsabilidades legales relacionadas con los casos de cáncer, las inversiones en la soya OGM Roundup Ready son la ceguera para el mercado.

O la esperanza de que engañando a los consumidores se pueda rescatar a Bayer/Monsanto.

Hay otra confusión ontológica relacionada con la comida falsa. Al mismo tiempo que proclaman alejarse de la carne, la “carne falsa” no es más que vender productos similares a la carne.

Pat Brown declara que “usamos levadura modificada genéticamente para producir heno, la molécula” mágica “que hace que la carne sepa a carne, y hace que la Hamburguesa Imposible sea el único producto de origen vegetal que ofrece la deliciosa explosión de sabor y aroma que los consumidores de carne ansían.”

Pensaba que la dieta basada en plantas era para veganos y vegetarianos, y no para los amantes de la carne.

Las grandes corporaciones alimentarias y los grandes intereses económicos son los impulsores de la fiebre de la comida falsa

De hecho, la promoción de los alimentos falsos parece tener más que ver con darle nueva vida a la agricultura de los OGM y a la industria de comida chatarra, y con la amenaza que supone el aumento de la conciencia que los alimentos orgánicos, locales y frescos es comida real que regenera el planeta y nuestra salud. En consecuencia, las inversiones en “empresas de elaboración de alimentos basados ​​en plantas” se ha disparado de casi 0 en 2009 a 600 millones de dólares en 2018. Y estas empresas están buscando más.

Pat Brown dice: “Si hay algo que sabemos, es que cuando una tecnología antigua que no se puede mejorar se encuentra con una mejor tecnología que se puede mejorar continuamente, es solo una cuestión de tiempo antes de que termine el juego”. Agregó: “creo que nuestros inversores ven esto como una oportunidad de $3 billones “.

Esto se trata de ganancias y control. Él, y aquellos otros que se unen a la fiebre de la comida falsa, no tienen conocimiento discernible, ni conciencia, ni compasión por los seres vivos, la red de la vida, ni el papel de la comida viva en el tejido de esa red.

Su repentino despertar ante las “dietas basadas en plantas”, incluida la soya OGM, es una violación ontológica de la comida como un sistema vivo que nos conecta con el ecosistema y otros seres, y demuestra ignorancia sobre la diversidad de culturas que han utilizado una diversidad de plantas en sus dietas.

Las ciencias ecológicas se han basado en el reconocimiento de las interconexiones y la interrelación entre los seres humanos y la naturaleza, entre diversos organismos y dentro de todos los sistemas vivos, incluido el cuerpo humano. Ha evolucionado así como una ciencia ecológica y de sistemas, no fragmentada y reduccionista. Las dietas han evolucionado según los climas y la biodiversidad local que permite el clima. La biodiversidad del suelo, de las plantas y de nuestro microbioma intestinal es un continuo. En la civilización India, las tecnologías son herramientas. Las herramientas deben ser evaluadas según criterios éticos, sociales y ecológicos. Las herramientas / tecnologías nunca han sido vistas como autorreferenciales. Han sido evaluadas en el contexto de cómo contribuyen al bienestar de todos.

Desde la perspectiva de la comida falsa, la evolución, la biodiversidad y la red de la vida se están redefiniendo como “tecnologías antiguas que no se pueden mejorar”; como la ignorancia de los sofisticados conocimientos que han evolucionado en diversas culturas agrícolas y alimentarias en diversos climas y ecosistemas para sostener y renovar la biodiversidad, los ecosistemas, la salud de las personas y el planeta.

El foro Eat que publicó un informe que trató de imponer al mundo una dieta monocultural de alimentos producidos con químicos e  ​​hiper-industrialmente procesados, está asociada a través de FrESH con la industria de la comida chatarra, y las grandes corporaciones agroindustriales como Bayer, BASF, Cargill, Pepsico, entre otros.

La comida falsa se basa así en un siglo y medio de imperialismo alimentario y la colonización de nuestros diversos conocimientos y culturas alimentarias.

Las corporaciones alimentarias y los grandes intereses económicos están detrás de la industria de la comida falsa. Bill Gates y Jeff Bezos están financiando nuevas empresas.

Necesitamos descolonizar nuestras culturas alimentarias y nuestras mentes del imperialismo alimentario

El occidente industrial siempre ha sido arrogante e ignorante de las culturas que ha colonizado. La “comida falsa” es simplemente lo mas nuevo en la historia del imperialismo alimentario.

La soya es un regalo de Asia oriental, donde ha sido un alimento durante milenios. Solo se consumía como alimento fermentado para eliminar sus factores antinutritivos. Pero recientemente, la soya OGM ha creado un imperialismo de soya, destruyendo la diversidad de plantas. Continúa con la destrucción de la diversidad de los ricos aceites comestibles y las proteínas de origen vegetal de los dals (legumbres) indios que hemos documentado.

Las mujeres de los barrios marginales de la India me pidieron que trajera nuestra mostaza de vuelta cuando se comenzó a inundar el mercado de India con aceite de soya OGM, y se prohibieron los aceites locales y  las unidades de prensado en frío en las aldeas. Fue entonces cuando empezamos el “sarson (mostaza) satyagraha” para defender nuestros aceites saludables prensados ​​en frío del dumping de aceite de soya OGM extraído con hexano. El hexano es una neurotoxina.

Si bien los campesinos de la India sabían que las legumbres fijan el nitrógeno, el occidente estaba industrializando la agricultura basada en nitrógeno sintético que contribuye a los gases de efecto invernadero, las zonas muertas en el océano y los suelos muertos. Mientras comíamos una diversidad de “dals” en nuestro diario “dal roti” (pan indio), los colonizadores británicos, que no tenían idea de la riqueza nutritiva de nuestras legumbres, las redujeron a la alimentación animal. Chana (garbanzo) se empezó a usar como pienso para gallinas, gahat se convirtió en pienso para caballos, y tur en pienso para palomas.

Nos encontramos ante un precipicio de una emergencia planetaria, una emergencia de salud, y una crisis por el sustento de los agricultores. La comida falsa acelerará la carrera hacia el colapso. La comida real nos da la oportunidad de rejuvenecer la tierra, nuestras economías alimentarias, la soberanía alimentaria y las culturas alimentarias. A través de la comida real podemos descolonizar nuestras culturas alimentarias y nuestra conciencia. Podemos recordar que la comida está viva y nos da vida.

Boicotea las hamburguesas OGM de Impossible. Haz tofu. Cocina dal (legumbres).

Si este artículo te fue útil, por favor considera compartirlo con tus redes.

Publicado con permiso de Independent Science News