Paul Saladino· MD
if we continue at the rate that we're going we're going to lose all of our farmable soil before the end of the first century of the 2000s so basically we've got like 65 years left of farmable soil
Loading…
The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
if we continue at the rate that we're going we're going to lose all of our farmable soil before the end of the first century of the 2000s so basically we've got like 65 years left of farmable soil
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
Global 60 harvests left there's no technological you know lab grown meat that's going to get us out of this situation this is the destruction of nutrients on the planet not just you know fresh food this is the destruction of at the base of of the Vitality of the microbiome we have 60 harvests left