Regenerative farming has entered the mainstream...

Editor's note: ...spotlight as policymakers and agricultural leaders publicly acknowledge soil health, nutrient density, and biodiversity as key to future food systems, backed by recent federal funding and national dialogue on sustainable practices. While critics note the funding remains small compared to conventional subsidies, the shift in language signals broader acceptance of farming that rebuilds soil biology and reduces reliance on chemical inputs. Integrating resilient, nutrient-dense heirloom and medieval wheat species into regenerative systems could further enhance crop diversity and soil health by reducing dependency on external inputs and strengthening agroecosystem resilience—linking historical crop traits with modern sustainable agriculture goals.
________

Regenerative Farming Just Went Mainstream; Here's Why It Matters

By Tyler Durden | December 14, 2025

Authored by Mollie Englehart via The Epoch Times.

My phone started dinging almost all at once.

Text messages, links, alerts—people were telling me that Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins was about to make a major announcement on Dec. 10 related to regenerative agriculture. A YouTube link was circulating. The livestream was about to begin. There was a sense of anticipation in the air.

When the video came on, Rollins stood alongside Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and others. What stood out immediately was not the funding amount, but the language: soil health, human health, nutrient density, the microbiome, and microbiology. The living systems beneath our feet and within our bodies were finally being discussed as part of one connected reality.

That language matters.

Then the announcement itself came: $700 million allocated toward regenerative agriculture.

On paper, that sounds significant. In reality, when spread across acreage that is already regenerative, it comes out to roughly $16 per acre. My phone began lighting up again—this time with frustration and disappointment. Farmers were doing the math. Many compared it to the $12 billion recently allocated to soybean farmers to ease losses from China no longer buying at previous levels. The imbalance felt familiar.

I felt that disappointment myself. But I stopped.

Because the truth is, the government is not going to save us. It never was.

What matters is what was said on stage—out loud, at the highest levels of agricultural leadership. Years of pushing, educating, farming, and speaking have forced the mainstream to acknowledge that regenerative agriculture exists and that what many of us have been saying for years is not fringe, not experimental, and not untested. It is rooted in biological reality.

Not long ago, when regenerative agriculture was barely even a term, a simple Google search would return little more than my brother Ryland Engelhart's small website and the work of Allan Savory. That was essentially it. Today, regenerative agriculture is discussed in policy rooms, media, and public health conversations. That shift did not happen by accident.

As someone who has spent years pounding the pavement on small stages, podcasts, newspaper articles, Instagram posts, and anywhere else someone might listen, hearing words that could have come straight from my own mouth—or from the mouths of so many friends—spoken by the Secretary of Agriculture was a real turning point.

It was not only agricultural language that shifted.

In the same period, advisers for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention held hearings on the hepatitis B vaccine and made recommendations to reconsider whether it should be universally mandatory in infancy. Hepatitis B is primarily transmitted through blood and bodily fluids, including sexual contact and needle exposure. These modes of transmission do not logically apply to newborn infants.

For decades, the trend has moved in only one direction, with more interventions introduced earlier and with less public debate. Seeing even one policy questioned openly represents a meaningful shift. It does not mean the system is fixed, but it does suggest that logic and discussion are beginning to reenter conversations where they have long been absent.

For years, soft language has been used to control public discourse. Conversations about vaccine efficacy, soil degradation, chemical agriculture, and the microbiome were not debated openly. They were often shut down through social pressure and professional risk.

That grip appears to be loosening.

Government leaders are now speaking openly about the microbiome, soil microbiology, and nutrient density. There is growing acknowledgment that chronic disease, metabolic dysfunction, and declining fertility do not exist in isolation from how our food is grown. Regenerative agriculture, once dismissed as niche, is now part of national policy discussions.

Please go to Zero Hedge to continue reading.

________

Editor's note: Medieval farmers cultivated resilient, nutrient-dense grains that flourished without synthetic inputs, yet these crops were largely displaced by industrial agriculture. Regenerative farming revives these forgotten systems by restoring soil biology and seed resilience, directly challenging an agricultural model dependent on chemical fertilizers, hybridization, and corporate control.

More Omega-3 than salmon per leaf. Why is the world's most nutritious plant classified as a weed?

It's a start:

France's top court blocks return of banned pesticide