&w=3840&q=100)
World Environment Day wake-up call: Save soil
Today, for the first time in humanity's history, we have to talk about protecting this planet which has nourished thousands of generations of human beings. In the last fifty years, 73 per cent of the vertebrate population and 80 per cent of the insect biomass on the planet has been wiped out. The way we are living, it is like we are planning to be the last generation on this planet.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
People believe that their life will be wonderful if the stock market soars. No, our life will be wonderful if we have nutritious food, clean water and pure air. For all this, we need a rich ecosystem. But approximately 27,000 species on the planet are going extinct every year.
The most fundamental ecological issue of all is soil extinction. About 95 per cent of life on the planet depends on soil, but right now the United Nations agencies are saying the planet has agricultural soil for only another eighty to hundred years! We are treating soil as an inert substance. But soil is a living system — the largest living system we know in this universe. A handful of soil in a tropical country has 5-7 billion organisms. Without their activity, we cannot exist.
People think plants take nourishment from the soil. No! Without the agency of microorganisms, plants cannot absorb any nourishment from soil. Right now, those agencies have become very weak because the volume of microorganisms has gone down. If the soil is weak, the plant will be weak. If the plant is weak, what makes you think you have not become weak?
Once there is not enough strength in the soil, vital micronutrients are no longer present in the food you eat. A study by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention of the United States says that all Americans are potassium deficient. About 90 per cent are deficient in vitamin E, 70 per cent in vitamin K, 45 per cent in magnesium, 43 per cent in vitamin A, and 39 per cent in vitamin C. And this is in the most affluent nation! This simply means that even if you eat enough food, it does not have sufficient nutrients because soil has no life left in it.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
There is substantial evidence today to show that mental health conditions are directly related to lack of micronutrients. As microbial life disappears, remaining psychologically stable is going to be a big challenge — that means our 'software' will start collapsing. If microbial species loss continues, even our 'hardware' will start collapsing over 25 to 40 years.
This is why we launched a massive movement across the world called Conscious Planet – Save Soil to bring about a global policy that there must be a minimum of 3-6 per cent organic matter in agricultural land, based on regional conditions. The movement reached over 4.1 billion people. Now the world's attention has been successfully turned to soil and I am very sure soil policies will be implemented. But we must understand that the damage to soil happened over a century; we cannot fix it overnight.
High time for humans to take care of the environment
The first signs of the human software beginning to collapse are already visible. Just a few decades ago, mental health problems were something that happened to someone else. But today, either someone you know is going through it or you yourself might be going through it. In the United States, the Surgeon General is saying one out of two people is lonely. This is not just in the United States. It is starting to happen across the world. Once loneliness happens, it is the incubation period for psychological illnesses.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
To address this, in February 2025, we launched the Miracle of Mind app, which offers a simple seven-minute meditative process that can be practiced anywhere to bring a sense of peace, joy, and exuberance into one's life.
It is high time we understand that this idea of individual life is a stupid idea. It is the magnanimity of creation that it has given us an individual experience, but life is happening as one big phenomenon. Once you break one part of it, every other part will be affected. This World Environment Day is the right occasion to remind ourselves of this. We as a generation of people have taken the largest bite from the planet. This is the time for us to rise and take corrective action for ourselves and the wellbeing of coming generations.
Yogi, Mystic and Visionary, Sadhguru is among the most influential of our times. A New York Times bestselling author, Sadhguru helps shape global policies and ideas. He is the only living Indian to have received three Presidential Awards from three different Presidents, among which is India's highest annual civilian award, the Padma Vibhushan and India's highest environmental award, the Indira Gandhi Paryavaran Puraskar. As part of the Conscious Planet initiative, he has launched the Save Soil movement, which has so far reached over 4.1 billion people, and the Miracle of Mind app, with the aim of empowering 3 billion people with tools for mental wellbeing. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost's views.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NDTV
15 hours ago
- NDTV
NASA Wants Nuclear Reactor On Moon By 2030. Here's Why That Matters
The first space race was about flags and footprints. Now, decades later, landing on the Moon is old news. The new race is to build there, and doing so hinges on power. In April 2025, China reportedly unveiled plans to build a nuclear power plant on the Moon by 2035. This plant would support its planned international lunar research station. The United States countered in August, when acting NASA Administrator Sean Duffy reportedly suggested a US reactor would be operational on the Moon by 2030. While it might feel like a sudden sprint, this isn't exactly breaking news. NASA and the Department of Energy have spent years quietly developing small nuclear power systems to power lunar bases, mining operations and long-term habitats. As a space lawyer focused on long-term human advancement into space, I see this not as an arms race but as a strategic infrastructure race. And in this case, infrastructure is influential. A lunar nuclear reactor may sound dramatic, but it's neither illegal nor unprecedented. If deployed responsibly, it could allow countries to peacefully explore the Moon, fuel their economic growth and test out technologies for deeper space missions. But building a reactor also raises critical questions about access and power. The legal framework already exists Nuclear power in space isn't a new idea. Since the 1960s, the US and the Soviet Union have relied on radioisotope generators that use small amounts of radioactive elements - a type of nuclear fuel - to power satellites, Mars rovers and the Voyager probes. The United Nations' 1992 Principles Relevant to the Use of Nuclear Power Sources in Outer Space, a nonbinding resolution, recognises that nuclear energy may be essential for missions where solar power is insufficient. This resolution sets guidelines for safety, transparency and international consultation. Nothing in international law prohibits the peaceful use of nuclear power on the Moon. But what matters is how countries deploy it. And the first country to succeed could shape the norms for expectations, behaviors and legal interpretations related to lunar presence and influence. Why being first matters The 1967 Outer Space Treaty, ratified by all major spacefaring nations including the US, China and Russia, governs space activity. Its Article IX requires that states act with "due regard to the corresponding interests of all other States Parties." That statement means if one country places a nuclear reactor on the Moon, others must navigate around it, legally and physically. In effect, it draws a line on the lunar map. If the reactor anchors a larger, long-term facility, it could quietly shape what countries do and how their moves are interpreted legally, on the Moon and beyond. Other articles in the Outer Space Treaty set similar boundaries on behavior, even as they encourage cooperation. They affirm that all countries have the right to freely explore and access the Moon and other celestial bodies, but they explicitly prohibit territorial claims or assertions of sovereignty. At the same time, the treaty acknowledges that countries may establish installations such as bases - and with that, gain the power to limit access. While visits by other countries are encouraged as a transparency measure, they must be preceded by prior consultations. Effectively, this grants operators a degree of control over who can enter and when. Building infrastructure is not staking a territorial claim. No one can own the Moon, but one country setting up a reactor could shape where and how others operate - functionally, if not legally. Infrastructure is influence Building a nuclear reactor establishes a country's presence in a given area. This idea is especially important for resource-rich areas such as the lunar south pole, where ice found in perpetually shadowed craters could fuel rockets and sustain lunar bases. These sought-after regions are scientifically vital and geopolitically sensitive, as multiple countries want to build bases or conduct research there. Building infrastructure in these areas would cement a country's ability to access the resources there and potentially exclude others from doing the same. Critics may worry about radiation risks. Even if designed for peaceful use and contained properly, reactors introduce new environmental and operational hazards, particularly in a dangerous setting such as space. But the U.N. guidelines do outline rigorous safety protocols, and following them could potentially mitigate these concerns. Why nuclear? Because solar has limits The Moon has little atmosphere and experiences 14-day stretches of darkness. In some shadowed craters, where ice is likely to be found, sunlight never reaches the surface at all. These issues make solar energy unreliable, if not impossible, in some of the most critical regions. A small lunar reactor could operate continuously for a decade or more, powering habitats, rovers, 3D printers and life-support systems. Nuclear power could be the linchpin for long-term human activity. And it's not just about the Moon - developing this capability is essential for missions to Mars, where solar power is even more constrained. A call for governance, not alarm The United States has an opportunity to lead not just in technology but in governance. If it commits to sharing its plans publicly, following Article IX of the Outer Space Treaty and reaffirming a commitment to peaceful use and international participation, it will encourage other countries to do the same. The future of the Moon won't be determined by who plants the most flags. It will be determined by who builds what, and how. Nuclear power may be essential for that future. Building transparently and in line with international guidelines would allow countries to more safely realize that future. A reactor on the Moon isn't a territorial claim or a declaration of war. But it is infrastructure. And infrastructure will be how countries display power - of all kinds - in the next era of space exploration.
Indian Express
2 days ago
- Indian Express
Knowledge Nugget: Why UPSC aspirants should read about M.S. Swaminathan
Take a look at the essential concepts, terms, quotes, or phenomena every day and brush up your knowledge. Here's your knowledge nugget for today on M.S. Swaminathan and his role in the Green Revolution. (Relevance: In 2019, UPSC asked a question, 'How did India benefit from the contributions of Sir M. Visvesvaraya and Dr. M. S. Swaminathan in the fields of water engineering and agricultural science respectively?' Swaminathan's contribution through the green revolution has redefined the agricultural landscape of India, making it an important topic for your exam.) August 7 marks the birth anniversary of M.S. Swaminathan. Hailed as the father of India's Green Revolution, Swaminathan passed away on September 28, 2023, at the age of 98. In 2024, he was conferred the Bharat Ratna posthumously. For his visionary leadership that propelled the Green Revolution to success, he was recognised as 'Father of Economic Ecology' by the United Nations Environment Programme. 1. Monkomb Sambasivan Swaminathan was born on August 7, 1925, in Kumbakonam, Tamil Nadu. Upon seeing the impact of the Bengal famine of 1942-43, he decided to change his subject from medical to agriculture. 2. He said, 'And, I also decided to go into agricultural research, and that too in genetics and breeding, for the simple reason that a good variety has the largest impact. A large number of farmers, whether small or large, can benefit from a good strain of a crop. I also got fascinated with the science of genetics as a whole.' 3. He played a major role in the set of changes introduced in farming in the 1960s and '70s that helped India achieve food security. In 1954, he started working at the Central Rice Research Institute, Cuttack, on transferring genes for fertiliser response from Japonica varieties to Indica varieties. He described this as 'The first attempt to develop high yielding varieties which can respond to good soil fertility and good water management.' 4. This was needed because post-independence, Indian agriculture was not very productive. Years of colonial rule impacted its development and the nation lacked the resources to modernise the sector. As a result, crops necessary for staple foods also had to be imported from countries like the US. If agriculture fails, everything will fail. – MSS 5. He was convinced of the need for breeding semi-dwarf varieties responsive to fertiliser application. The problem with the traditional wheat and rice varieties was that they were tall and slender. These 'lodged' – fell flat on the ground — when they grew and their earheads were heavy with well-filled grains produced in response to high fertiliser doses. 6. His strategy of developing semi-dwarf wheat varieties using mutagenesis — exposing plants to chemicals or radiation to introduce desirable modifications in their DNA — did not work. The search for an ideal variety led him to contact American scientist Orville Vogel which led him to Prof. Norman E. Borlaug, Director of International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), Mexico. 7. According to the Indian Agricultural Research Institution (IARI), 'Prof. Swaminathan and Prof. Borlaug collaborated, with Borlaug touring India and sending supplies for a range of Mexican dwarf varieties of wheat ('Lerma Rojo' and 'Sonora-64') from Mexico, which were to be bred with Japanese varieties.' 8. 'We started working seriously on dwarf wheat breeding programme in 1963, and within five years, there was what was called the 'Wheat Revolution'. Indira Gandhi, the then Prime Minister of India, released a special stamp to mark the achievement,' Swaminathan said. 9. Swaminathan also worked in mangrove restoration and preservation of coastal land in Kendrapara district of Odisha for around 12 years since 1994. In 1999, he introduced the concept of trusteeship management of biosphere reserves. 10. He implemented the Gulf of Mannar Biosphere Reserve Trust with financial support from the Global Environment Facility (GEF). Following the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake, he advised India to plant new mangroves along the shoreline to minimise damage from future tsunamis. 11. As the head of the National Commission on Farmers from 2004-06, he recommended that the Minimum Support Price at which farmers sell their crops to the government should be at least 50 per cent more than the weighted average cost of production. 1. Despite its landmark role in achieving food sufficient in India, the Green Revolution has been criticised on multiple counts, such as benefiting the already prosperous farmers as it was introduced in states with higher productivity. 2. Expressing his concern over indiscriminate pumping of groundwater in Punjab, Swaminathan in 2019 in his piece of advice for successive governments, had said: 'The groundwater situation in the Punjab is not good. Free electricity or low cost electricity should be avoided, since this promotes excessive pumping of groundwater. I have high regards for Punjab farmers.' 3. On the possibility of ushering 'second green revolution', he had said, 'The term I prefer to use is evergreen revolution which is very much possible if Punjab focuses on two things- farm economics and farm ecology. Improving yield per hectare without ecological harm is the challenge and that is what I call evergreen revolution.' It was William S Gaud, administrator of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), who coined the term 'Green Revolution'. Norman Borlaug is called the 'father of the green revolution'. He pioneered a technique called shuttle breeding, which accelerated the development of new wheat varieties capable of thriving in different climates. Match List-I with List-II and select the correct answer from the code given below the lists: (UPPSC 2022) (a) A-2, B-4, C-1, D-3 (b) A-2, B-3, C-4, D-1 (c) A-1, B-2, C-3, D-4 (d) A4, B2, C-1, D-3 (Source: How MS Swaminathan triggered the Green Revolution and helped India achieve food security, New Delhi has chance to repay Green Revolution debt: Why doing so is in India's interest, MS Swaminathan's evergreen revolution: Productivity without ecological harm) Subscribe to our UPSC newsletter. Stay updated with the latest UPSC articles by joining our Telegram channel – IndianExpress UPSC Hub, and follow us on Instagram and X. 🚨 Click Here to read the UPSC Essentials magazine for July 2025. Share your views and suggestions in the comment box or at Khushboo Kumari is a Deputy Copy Editor with The Indian Express. She has done her graduation and post-graduation in History from the University of Delhi. At The Indian Express, she writes for the UPSC section. She holds experience in UPSC-related content development. You can contact her via email: ... Read More
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
4 days ago
- First Post
Ditch that soda and noodles. The lung cancer link to ultra-processed foods
A study in the Thorax journal reveals that those consuming ultra-processed foods like fast food and sugary drinks have a 41 per cent higher risk of developing lung cancer compared to those who ate the least. The study analysed data of over 100,000 Americans aged 55 to 74, who were tracked for more than a decade read more We've known for a while that our go-to ultra-processed foods, like fast food, sugary drinks, and instant meals, aren't exactly the best for our health. They're often linked to heart problems and metabolic issues. But now, a new study points to another worrying connection. These foods might also raise the risk of lung cancer. Published in the journal Thorax, the research found that people who ate the most ultra-processed foods had a 41 per cent higher risk of developing lung cancer compared to those who ate the least. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD So, what counts as ultra-processed food? And how could it be linked to cancer? Here's what we know about the new study. But first, what are ultra-processed foods? Ultra-processed foods (UPFs) are industrially manufactured products made from a combination of refined ingredients and additives. They are designed to be hyper-palatable, convenient, and have a long shelf life. Unlike minimally processed foods, UPFs are made mostly from substances extracted from foods, such as fats, starches, added sugars, and unhealthy fats, rather than the whole food itself. They undergo extensive alterations and typically contain artificial substances like emulsifiers, preservatives, colourants, and sweeteners. As a result, UPFs tend to be calorie-dense but low in essential nutrients and fibre, making them nutritionally poor despite their appealing taste. Rows of ultraprocessed potato chips are placed at a convenience store in Boston. File image/AP In the UK and US, more than half of the average diet consists of ultra-processed foods (UPFs), which include frozen meals, soft drinks, hot dogs and cold cuts, fast food, packaged cookies, cakes, and salty snacks. What does the new study reveal? The study draws data from the US Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial, which followed over 100,000 Americans aged 55 to 74. Participants enrolled between 1993 and 2001, and their health was tracked for more than a decade. Out of 101,732 people who filled out food questionnaires at the start, researchers categorised their diets based on how processed the foods were, with a special focus on ultra-processed foods (UPFs) like lunch meats, soft drinks, ice cream, baked goods, instant noodles, and fast food. Researchers believe rising global consumption of UPFs could be contributing to the growing burden of diseases, such as cancer. Image for Representation. Reuters On average, people consumed nearly three servings of UPFs a day, with some having up to six. Over 12 years, 1,706 lung cancer cases were diagnosed, including both non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and small cell lung cancer (SCLC). STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Even after accounting for factors like smoking and diet quality, those who ate the most UPFs had a 37 per cent higher risk of NSCLC and a 44 per cent higher risk of SCLC. The researchers believe rising global consumption of UPFs could be contributing to the growing burden of diseases, such as cancer and stressed the need for more research to confirm these findings across diverse populations. 'Over the past two decades, consumption of ultra-processed foods has significantly increased worldwide, regardless of development or economic status,' the authors wrote. This rise may be driving global increases in obesity, cardiovascular disease, and cancer, they added. How might heavily processed foods increase cancer risk? Researchers believe one reason is that ultra-processed foods often replace healthier options, like fruits, vegetables, and whole grains, that may help protect against cancer. When diets become dominated by UPFs, there's simply less room for the good stuff. There's also growing concern about the additives and chemicals found in these products. Ingredients like emulsifiers, preservatives, artificial colours, and acrolein (a toxic compound also found in tobacco smoke) may lead to inflammation, disrupt hormones, damage DNA, and upset the gut microbiome. The packaging materials used for many of these foods can also be a source of risk. Chemicals like bisphenol A (BPA) and phthalates, commonly found in food containers and wrappers, may leach into the food and have been linked to health issues, the study noted. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD So, what can you do? Nutritionist Rob Hobson, author of Unprocess Your Family Life, told The Independent that it's less about blaming specific foods and more about c 'That might mean cooking more from scratch where possible, adding in more whole foods like vegetables, beans and grains, or just becoming more aware of how often UPFs show up in your day,' he said Also read: What is fibremaxxing, the new diet trend taking over social media? How safe is it? Making small, sustainable changes will help you gradually replace junk food with more nutritious, whole foods Image for Representation. Pixabay 'It's not about being perfect, it's about balance and understanding how your food choices could be supporting or undermining your long-term health.' In short, cutting back on ultra-processed foods doesn't require a complete lifestyle overhaul. But being mindful of how often these foods appear on your plate, and gradually replacing them with more nutritious, whole foods, can go a long way in supporting better health. With input from agencies
