soil conditions vs homeopathic remedies in curing

For sharing results, experiences and thoughts on preparations - biodynamic or other. These do not include 'peppers'
jpercival
Posts: 3
Joined: 19 Sep 2008, 00:31
Location: Colorado

soil conditions vs homeopathic remedies in curing

Post by jpercival »

It is estimated that 80% of plant pathology derives from soil nutrient deficiencies (CSU Extension service). Even Hahnemann spoke of addressing first cause in treating patients. That being said, one has to question the efficacy of homeopathic tx of diseased plants without first determining soil conditions that are conducive to the health of the particular plant under question. I do not question homeopathy's (or other alternative measures e.g. biodynamic) value in horticulture, simply whether basics such as nutrition should be examined first. I welcome reader feedback. Thank you.
Mark
Site Admin
Posts: 1850
Joined: 12 Jan 2006, 11:26
Location: Forest of Dean, UK
Contact:

Post by Mark »

Thanks for joining in. It sure seems like a no-brainer - that the soil must be about right before we can start thinking of curing anything through whichever additional discipline.

Dr Steiner, in his agriculture course, would agree with you but also want to say more. He says that rational manuring would prevent most plant diseases. The devilish detail is what he meant by 'rational'.

One of the things he is most insistent about is that nitrogen should come from a living source. If we bring in nitrogen by fixing it from the atmosphere using electricity - as I believe is mainly done now - we do not meet those demands.

So what is the difference between nitrogen isolated in this way and one fixed by legumes or from animal wastes that have been stabilised (or even transmuted) by proper composting? His answer is that our current science only considers half of what it means to nourish. However complex the orthodox story has become, the current model is that we refuel ourselves through what we eat and this food is broken down and sent around the body like a stream of spare molecular parts to be integrated into the body replacing worn out parts which are excreted through slightly different transport routes.

RS's idea is that the physical food we take in just works to 'stretch' the physical body but what really nourishes us comes through other intake channels - our breathing and our senses - even what comes through our eyes!! It's a very strange idea for us I think. But that's his considered view which he says is ultimately just a fact! (If you want to read a bit more about this I would suggest reading the Agriculture course. In particular this is gone into in lectures four and five in which he builds the reasoning behind his compost preparations 502 - 507.) This 'subtle' nutrition requires material nutrition of a certain quality for the right stretch. This also applies to plants - particularly in their flowering and fruiting parts - just as it is asserted to be the case for humans and animals.

So back to your question - if 'soil nutrient deficiencies' is essentially considered to mean that the right chemical elements are within reach of the roots of the plants RS at least would suggest that it is only part of the story, and that a crucial part of the story needs to be grasped to do rational manuring. His 'biodynamic preparations' in the muck heaps can be considered to find their rationale in bringing in the subtle nutrition to plants at the same time as bringing the appropriate quality to the compost and manure.

It would be simpler to simply 'bolt on' homeopathic remediation of agriculture to the standard understanding of farming but this is not the way of Steiner.

However, I would also strongly agree that getting the soil and manure right is absolutely crucial. It would be a shame if folk thought that homeopathic and biodynamic remedies can get us out of jail free for our shoddy grasp of the basics of agriculture.
Post Reply Previous topicNext topic