Actually, plants do make minerals by breaking rock particles up with
rhizome micro roots , acids and enzymes as well as natural acids in rains.
[Lighting makes a weak acid rain for one ] Acids make mineral salts out
of minerals that plants can use. Recycling absorbed content by not removing
plant matter would help concentrate whatever minerals and bring leeched
already 'made' mineral salts back up to the surface, of course.
The problem with industrial acid rain isn't so much "burning" as it is an
over nutrition of plants making them produce buds too early. Some of the
burn is fertilizer burn.
The desired rock has to be there however and minerals are by no means
evenly distributed. [Ask any miner]
If the rock that makes up the mineral soil has no chromium, none will be
available. Plants don't walk around.
There can be other reasons for a decline in 'body' chromium, like choice
of foods and the way that animals are raised.
Certain other means can chelate minerals out, so, what does the likes of
air pollution do? ..or fluorine ? ..or chlorine?
If chromium levels and a source for lack are to be determined, one must
stick to a context. Measuring chromium in *bodies* doesn't say anything
about chromium in food. A generalization like that has to be far from
meaningful. What food, from where? Who is eating what? What else is a
body doing?
If someone with diabetes is eating mostly refined sugar, chromium levels
are bound to be low. Someone who drinks blackstrap probably doesn't have
diabetes and won't be tested. [and sugar cane is likely to be grown on a
volcanic island which would make it a bit rare for the old timers back when
Florida was nothing but a tangle of alligators and a Southeast Texas big
thicket was just that.]
"Natural Food Sources Containing Chromium: Molasses, brewer's yeast, whole
wheat bread, some fruit juices, cheese, liver, beef."
"Health Warnings, News & Tips for Chromium: Deficiencies may be an
increased risk for: long term dieters, pregnant women, and individuals who
consume high levels of alcohol."
"Romaine lettuce is an excellent source of chromium while onions and
tomatoes are very good sources of this mineral. Other food sources of
chromium include brewer's yeast, oysters, liver, whole grains, bran
cereals, and [unpeeled ?] potatoes. Many people do not get enough chromium
in their diet due to food processing methods that remove the naturally
occuring chromium in commonly consumed foods."
See a modern problem there? Who besides me doesn't peel
potatoes? Wonderbread builds starved rats 12 ways. Don't eat beef and
cheese because you're afraid of the cholesterol ? Don't like liver?
[yuk] Only eat Iceberg lettuce and very little of that? No mustard
greens? [another source mentioned elsewhere ]
To test for an over all increase or decrease of a specific substance over
a period of time in plants would take detailed stats over a very broad
range of area. There's nothing to compare by. The stats weren't
determined or kept in the distant past and those old foods aren't around in
enough variety and quantity to be of any use.
You could dig up some old bodies, but they ate differently than we do now
and that wouldn't say a thing about chromium in plants or soil either.
Some plants have an affinity for certain minerals that others don't. Even
with that affinity, if the mineral isn't there in the rock and hasn't been
deposited otherwise, it won't be absorbed.
Minerals do walk around in some places like river bottomland and rivers
are being "controlled" these days. Volcanic eruptions and forest fires
[fly ash] spread minerals far and wide but not always very evenly.
Animals don't get to range about for locational variety these days...and,
some people don't eat meat, eggs or milk products.
If that animal didn't eat the mineral, nor will you.
One fertilizing element you didn't mention is potash.
"The name comes from the English words pot and ash, referring to its
discovery in the water-soluble fraction of wood ash. It is today
principally produced by mining suitable deposits which are found throughout
the world."
Where does the phosphorus and potassium in NPK come from?
If micro nutrients aren't listed, that doesn't mean they aren't there,
it only means they aren't listed.
Have you read the label to see one way or another? I haven't , except
for what small gardeners buy and it's sometimes there...if...that's the
same thing that "NPK" is. { I'll ask the agribiz familiar farmer when he
gets home tonight }
Modern transportation would make wide distribution of minerals more
likely, not less likely.
Potash is mostly potassium products but also contains every trace mineral
that tree pulled up from under the ground...but a given mineral still has
to be present in that mineral soil [broken down rock] for a tree to pull it up.
In Manitoba, that would be 130,000 metric tons per year.
I don't have Excel installed to read the USA stats.
http://www.ers.usda.gov/Data/FertilizerUse/
Overview
This product brings together 1964-2003 data on fertilizer consumption by
plant nutrient and major selected products; consumption of mixed
fertilizers and secondary and micro-nutrients; and percent of crop area
receiving fertilizer and fertilizer use per receiving acre by nutrient in
the major producing States for corn, cotton, soybeans, and wheat; and
fertilizer farm prices, indices of wholesale fertilizer price and indices
of fertilizer price paid by farmers.
Data Files
Tables are in Excel spreadsheet format.
Fertilizer Consumption and Useby Year
<http://www.ers.usda.gov/Data/FertilizerUse/Tables/Fert%20Use%20Table%201.xls>Table
1U.S. consumption of nitrogen, phosphate, and potash for 1960-2003.
<http://www.ers.usda.gov/Data/FertilizerUse/Tables/Fert%20Use%20Table%202.xls>Table
2U.S. plant nutrient use by corn, soybeans, cotton, and wheat for 1964-2003.
<http://www.ers.usda.gov/Data/FertilizerUse/Tables/Fert%20Use%20Table%203.xls>Table
3U.S. consumption of single, multiple, and secondary and micro nutrients
for 1960-2003.
<http://www.ers.usda.gov/Data/FertilizerUse/Tables/Fert%20Use%20Table%204.xls>Table
4U.S. consumption of selected nitrogen materials for 1960-2003.
<http://www.ers.usda.gov/Data/FertilizerUse/Tables/Fert%20Use%20Table%205.xls>Table
5U.S. consumption of selected phosphate and potash fertilizers for 1960-2003.
<http://www.ers.usda.gov/Data/FertilizerUse/Tables/Fert%20Use%20Table%206.xls>Table
6U.S. consumption of selected secondary, micronutrients, and natural
organic materials for 1960-2003.
At 02:04 PM 8/5/2006 -0400, you wrote:
Much of my information comes from my company listening in on conference
calls and asking the doctors that work for the company my numerous and
often skeptical questions. However long before this experience I've been
researching many different sources and reviewing many opinions from
Medical Doctors, Osteopaths, Naturopaths and Nutritionists, and so on and
assume many of you who must be health conscious have too . One of the
things I point to is how studies HAVE been done for the past decades in
regards to the level of chromium in our blood, a trace mineral that
regulates blood sugar among other things. All but one test showed steady
decline and the immediate tests afterwards showed continued decline. I'd
have to find the study/article but I could show you the dramatic results
that help show that clearly even if the 1936 testing was small in scope or
even flawed, there is no way that our general produce has gotten better in
mineral content! We fertilize our soils with NPK primarily and have for
about one hundred years. This is nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium.
Farmers use what is necessary for their yield. This is only two minerals,
phosphorus and potassium that are being ''reimbursed''. No real effort can
be given to trace minerals, or even macro-minerals like calcium. Our soils
as far as big time farms are being slowly depleted of ALL minerals but
what is in NPK. Those two minerals and nitrogen are the only nourishment
necessary to get your apples and Idaho Potatoes and corn from Ohio, etc.
Sure sometimes they use Boric acid [Boron], etc. in small amounts or you
find smaller farms or personal farms that have some good methods
[hopefully like mine] and help a little bit, but this doesn't really help
the majority using standard cheap, inorganic produce from big company
farms concerned with patents of Genetically engineered products and
getting as much yield for as little resources [money] as possible. And the
small farms really don't ever come close to complete soil nourishment even
with good methods IMO. So no matter what pick of great looking and
abundant produce you have in a country ''seemingly'' the richest in food
quality and I would think obviously in quantity you are going to be faced
with ever depleted soils. This is what those of us witnessing this slow
catastrophe have been saying for years. Getting the appropriate ratio and
optimal amount of all vitamins, amino acids and essential fatty acids is
quite frankly impossible unless you are in the severe minority of people
who have near perfect diets. As for the minerals? Your apples and bush
beans and onions DON'T MAKE MINERALS. Plants don't make minerals. If you
can imagine given this view how we've improved anything but our caloric
intake and protein availability since 1936 for the average American by
depleting our soils and converting to high usage of vitamin and mineral
depleting diets [i.e. soda pop, table sugar, High fructose corn syrup, Red
Bull, Ramen Noodles and Campbell's MSG gumbo] than you have quite an
imagination. I can't picture it myself though. As far as I'm concerned,
being robbed of selenium alone has contributed more to death and
degeneration in America by disease- as well as some supposedly genetic
diseases- than our FDA or AMA would ever admit no matter how compelling
the evidence. This is my opinion once again, and I'm not a doctor, a
scientist or an actor. So hey you know.
''Lance''
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.7/409 - Release Date: 8/4/2006
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.7/410 - Release Date: 8/5/2006
--
The Silver List is a moderated forum for discussing Colloidal Silver.
Instructions for unsubscribing are posted at: http://silverlist.org
To post, address your message to: [email protected]
Address Off-Topic messages to: [email protected]
The Silver List and Off Topic List archives are currently down...
List maintainer: Mike Devour <[email protected]>
