Protecting Yourself and Your Family from Radiation Toxicity.

Dear Reader,

Thursday, 11/13 is the day to discover my new bestseller,
Protecting Yourself and Your Family from Radiation Toxicity 
by Dr. Sundardas D. Annamalay.
Your cell phone sends out energy or radio waves that are very similar to

the ones used by your microwave oven to reheat leftover pizza.

Does that make you wonder what your cell phone might be doing to your brain?

My new book will demystify radiation toxicity and what you can do to protect you and your family.
Here is the link: <>

  1. TODAY, 11/13, access the online, Kindle or download version of the book forjust US $0.99 for 24 hours only!
    2. Write a brief review of the book or the preview after purchase.

We are shooting for 5 stars!
3. Share this outstanding opportunity TODAY with friends using sample copy below.


What does your cell phone and microwave have in common?
Discover how to protect you and yours in new Bestseller.
For 24 hours only US $0.99! 


Your cell phone can be your brain’s worst enemy!
Find out why in new Bestseller.
For 24 hours only US $0.99!

Discover how to protect yourself and your family from radiation toxicity
in new Bestseller. For 24 hours only US $0.99!



Slow death by your sofa (Part 2)


Now, you may already know about the dangers of toxins. And you may already do everything you can to avoid them — like eating organic food, drinking filtered water, or using natural products in your home. But what you may not know is that even if you take all these precautions, your body can still be contaminated.

In one recent study, scientists tested a group of families for 107 different man-made toxins. They tested blood and urine samples from each family member. Every family member was tested including grandparents, parents and children.

Here’s what they found… Every single person from the youngest to the oldest was contaminated with toxins. And the family members with the most toxins in their bodies were between the ages of 58 and 92.

In fact, scientists discovered over 63 different chemicals in the bodies of the oldest generation! They found PCBs, organochlorine pesticides, brominated flame retardants, perfluorinated chemicals, and more.

And these aren’t the only toxins that may be lurking in your body…

A comprehensive survey by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control found 148 different chemicals in the blood and urine samples of 2,400 Americans. More than a quarter of all the samples contained benzo(a)pryene, a toxin found in automobile exhaust fumes. And nine out of ten samples contained a mixture of toxic pesticides.

A comprehensive survey by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control found 148 different chemicals in the blood and urine samples of 2,400 Americans.More than a quarter of all the samples contained benzo(a)pryene, a toxin found in automobile exhaust fumes. And nine out of ten samples contained a mixture of toxic pesticides.

National Geographic Magazine paid nearly $15,000 to test one of their reporters for the presence of 320 different chemicals as part of an undercover investigation into environmental toxins. They discovered that the reporter’s level of one flame retardant chemical was so high it would have been considered alarming, even if the reporter had worked in a plant that manufactured the chemical!

A Mount Sinai School of Medicine study found a total of 167 different chemicals in the blood and urine samples of volunteers. That’s an average of 91 toxins each. They found lead, dioxins, PCBs, phthalate DEHP, as well as compounds that have been banned for more than a quarter century. Bottom line: every single person in every study was contaminated.

So, if you’re tired all the time, this could be the reason why… 

If you suffer from joint pain and inflammation, this could be the reason why…

And if you’re plagued by “senior moments” and brain fog, this could be the reason why…

be well

Dr Sundardas D Annamalay

Slow Death by your sofa (Part 1)

When many people think about toxic pollution, they think about smog, polluted rivers, or landfills. But today, the worst toxins aren’t found “out there” in toxic waste dumps and polluted rivers… Today the worst toxins are found right here in our own homes, in the ordinary objects we use every day — like sofas, skillets, shower curtains and even rubber ducks!

That’s because we are all soaking in a toxic marinade of chemicals. Every day a  whopping 42 billion pounds of chemicals are manufactured or brought into the U.S. That’s enough toxins to fill 623,000 tanker trucks in a line that could straddle the globe three times. And every day more and more of these chemicals slowly seep into our bodies.

Scientists have been studying the health effects of toxins for years. But until now, no one had ever studied the cumulative effects of the thousands of low-level toxins we come into contact with every day.

So two scientists and entrepreneurs decided to turn themselves into Guinea pigs. First, they took samples of their blood and sent them to a lab to be tested for toxins.

Then they shut themselves up in a condo for two days surrounded by everyday things. Everyday things that are manufactured in our modern world with modern day chemicals that are supposedly safe for us… Things like couches, carpets, shower curtains, skillets, and shampoo.

These scientists-turned-Guinea-pigs didn’t do anything extreme. They didn’t eat massive amounts of mercury-loaded fish. They didn’t inhale bottles of perfume. They lived an ordinary life for two days in a modern condo surrounded by the everyday things we all use.

Then at the end of the two days, the two men again sent their blood samples to the lab to be tested for chemical toxins in their blood. And what they found scared the living daylights out of them.

In just two days surrounded by these ordinary everyday objects, one of the men increased his urine levels of monoethyl phthalate (MEP) 22 times, his levels of bisphenol A 7.5 times and his levels of triclosan a mind-blowing 2,900 times.

In fact, he was so disturbed by the test results that he put the clothes he had worn for the two days into a plastic bag and took them home and washed them over and over again. Until his wife asked him what the heck he was doing. He cringed when he realized how absurd it was to think he could wash away the contamination in his body by washing his clothes!

be well

Dr Sunardas D. Annamalay

Are you microwaving your brain?

The most basic fact about cell phones and cell towers is that they emit microwave radiation; so do Wi-Fi (wireless Internet) antennas, wireless computers, cordless (portable) phones and their base units, and all other wireless devices. If it’s a communication device and it’s not attached to the wall by a wire, it’s emitting radiation.

Most Wi-Fi systems and some cordless phones operate at the exact same frequency as a microwave oven, while other devices use a different frequency. Wi-Fi is always on and always radiating. The base units of most cordless phones are always radiating, even when no one is using the phone. A cell phone that is on but not in use is also radiating. And, needless to say, cell towers are always radiating.

Why is this a problem, you might ask? Scientists usually divide the electromagnetic spectrum into “ionizing” and “non-ionizing.” Ionizing radiation, which includes x-rays and atomic radiation, causes cancer. Non-ionizing radiation, which includes microwave radiation, is supposed to be safe. This distinction always reminded me of the propaganda in George Orwell’s Animal Farm: “Four legs good, two legs bad.” “Non-ionizing good, ionizing bad” is as little to be trusted.
An astronomer once quipped that if Neil Armstrong had taken a cell phone to the Moon in 1969, it would have appeared to be the third most powerful source of microwave radiation in the universe, next only to the Sun and the Milky Way. He was right. Life evolved with negligible levels of microwave radiation.

** An increasing number of scientists speculate that our body’s own cells, in fact, use the microwave spectrum to communicate with one another, like children whispering in the dark, and that cell phones, like jackhammers, interfere with their signaling.

** In any case, it is a fact that we are all being bombarded, day in and day out, whether we use a cell phone or not, by an amount of microwave radiation that is some ten million times as strong as the average natural background. And it is also a fact that most of this radiation is due to technology that has been developed since the 1970s.

As far as cell phones themselves are concerned, if you put one up to your head you are damaging your brain in a number of different ways. First, think of a microwave oven. A cell phone, like a microwave oven and unlike a hot shower, heats you from the inside out, not from the outside in. And there are no sensory nerve endings in the brain to warn you of a rise in temperature because we did not evolve with microwave radiation, and this never happens in nature.

Worse, the structure of the head and brain is so complex and non-uniform that “hot spots” are produced, where heating can be tens or hundreds of times what it is nearby. Hot spots can occur both close to the surface of the skull and deep within the brain, and also on a molecular level.

Cell phones are regulated by the Federal Communications Commission, and you can find, in the packaging of most new phones, a number called the Specific Absorption Rate, or SAR, which is supposed to indicate the rate at which energy is absorbed by the brain from that particular model. One problem, however, is the arbitrary assumption, upon which the FCC’s regulations are based, that the brain can safely dissipate added heat at a rate of up to 1 degree C per hour.

Compounding this is the scandalous procedure used to demonstrate compliance with these limits and give each cell phone its SAR rating. The standard way to measure SAR is on a “phantom” consisting, incredibly, of a homogenous fluid encased in Plexiglas in the shape of a head. Presto, no hot spots! But in reality, people who use cell phones for hours per day are chronically heating places in their brain. The FCC’s safety standard, by the way, was developed by electrical engineers, not doctors.

Be well

Dr Sundardas

If you want to be learn more please click the following link.

Electromagnetic toxicity and illness (Part 1)

As the computer visual display (VDU) unit became more common in the workplace, the issue of radiation hazards associated with the prolonged use of VDU’s were tested by reputable laboratories and found to emit no detectable levels of X-  rays. A similar study by Canadian Radiation Protection. Bureau researchers arrived at the same conclusion. World  Health Organisation (WHO) experts endorsed similar findings. Given such reassurances, the temptation has been to  conclude that VDU’s are harmless. However, deeper more haunting statistics suggest that health problems from VDU’s could arise from electromagnetic radiation.

      The early research did not consider all the relevant data. Since 1979 small clusters of miscarriage and birth defects among VDU users in a dozen or more office locations have been reported. Due to the low level of X-ray radiation around VDU’s, authorities often dismissed the increased incidence of these abnormalities as chance occurrences, while  others argued alternately that the reported defects could be  hereditary.  

      In 1982 Delagado and others reported powerful inhibitory effects on chicken embryos produced by weak 100 H2 {28}  electromagnetic fields. The following year Ubeda and others also observed ‘teratogenic” changes or monstrous mutations to chicken embryos exposed to low intensity pulsed electromagnetic fields of 100Hz. The most deterious effects  were observed with a weak magnetic field strengths of about 1  micro Tesla, with stronger and weaker fields less effective.   Since the original work of Delgado and co-workers, several more recent studies have confirmed that weak  electromagnetic fields are capable of interacting with  biological systems of specific frequencies and intensities. Since magnetic field strength pulses of up to 400,000 microtesla have been reported with VDU’s it follows that weak  magnetic pulses will exist even at a considerable distance  from the units. 

 With approximately half the workforce using VDU’s being women of childbearing age, the health implications are enormous.  McDonald and co-workers who studied births in the Montreal area in 1984, reported, that the rate of spontaneous  abortion in 2609 current pregnancies with no VDU use was 5.7%  compared to 8.3% for 588 with weekly exposure of less than 15  hours and 9.4% for 710 pregnancies with VDU use greater than  15 hours per week.

In 1988 Goldhaber and co-workers found in a case control study of pregnancy outcome that there exists:  “Significantly elevated risk of miscarriage for working women who using VDU’s for more than 20 hours per week during the first trimester of pregnancy compared to other working who reported not using VDUs”. The increased risk could not be explained by age, education, occupation, smoking, alcohol consumption on other maternal characteristics.  


be well

Dr Sundardas D. Annamalay




The Fluoride Myth (Part 3)

The year before water fluoridation began in the United States, the entire dental profession recognized that fluoride was detrimental to dental health. In fact, in 1944 the Journal of the American Dental Association reported that using between 1.6 and 4 ppm (parts per million) fluoride in water would cause 50% of adults to need false teeth. On top of that, the world’s largest study looked at 400,000 students, revealing that tooth decay increased in over 25% with just 1ppm fluoride in drinking water

Yet still, in 1945, fluoride was put into municipal water systems in Newburgh, New York, and Grand Rapids, Michigan. Over the next 50 years, more than 60 percent of the U.S. population was “fluoridated” at a minimum of 1 ppm. Currently, over 75% of the United States water supply contains this deadly toxin.

One part of the hoax, “fluoride helps with tooth formation,” was removed from the “American Fluoride Campaign” early on. Realizing this might expose the entire campaign as fraudulent, the FDA and CDC simply removed that language, but kept the masses believing that fluoride keeps dental cavities at bay.

Over 70% of America still clings to the multi-faceted myth;

Research proves that fluoride is an extremely neurotoxic chemical which interrupts basic functions of nerve cells in the brain and can lead to Alzheimer’s, atherosclerosis (hardening of the arteries), infertility, birth defects, diabetes, cancer and lowered IQ. The aluminum “tricks” the blood-brain barrier and allows chemical access to brain tissue.

Think fluoride is used by the rest of the world? France, Germany, Japan, Sweden, Denmark, Holland, Finland, India and Great Britain have all rejected its use after special commissions and health secretaries reviewed the negative evidence.

Think fluoride cleanses the water? Fluoride is one of the basic ingredients in military nerve gas. Sodium fluoride is a hazardous waste by-product from the manufacture of aluminum and fertilizer, and it is a common ingredient in roach and rat poisons.

Think fluoride fights cavities and strengthens bones? Dental fluorosis is often caused by over-exposure to fluoride when the dental enamel is mineralizing during childhood. Fluoride is unique in its ability among acids to penetrate tissue, causing soft tissue damage and bone erosion as it leaches calcium and magnesium from the body.

Think fluoride evaporates from water? Fluoride does not evaporate from water left sitting out. Also,boiling or freezing won’t help at all, and basic filters like Brita do not remove it. Reverse osmosis does remove it, and natural spring water does not contain it.

Because the ADA maintains a stranglehold on the dental profession, no dentists are ever openly critical of fluoride. The ADA can influence State Dental Boards which can take away a dentist’s license, so you won’t hear anything negative about it from your dentist. Most brands of toothpaste contain at least 1,000 ppm fluoride, so if a child were to eat an entire tube, he/she would die.

Fluoride has never received FDA approval and does not meet “requirements of safety and effectiveness.” The FDA states that fluoride is a prescription drug. Because this “drug” is put in municipal water, there is absolutely no control over individual dosage.

be well

Dr Sundardas D. Annamalay

How Fluoride was transformed from a toxic waste to a “National Saviour” (Part 2)

Dr. Frederick S. McKay was born in 1874 in Lawrence, Massachusetts. He was a 1900 graduate of the Dental School University of Pennsylvania and came to Colorado Springs in 1901. Partially because he had the inquisitiveness of a recent graduate and partially because he was not a native of Colorado Springs, Dr. McKay was intrigued by the number of patients whose teeth were stained with white or brown spots; and in severe cases, the enamel was pitted.


Following years of observation and study, McKay determined that it was high levels of naturally occurring fluoride in the drinking water that was causing the mottled enamel. McKay’s deductions were researched by Dr. H. Trendley Dean, a dental officer of the U.S. Public Health Service. Dean designed the first fluoride studies in the United States. These early studies were aimed at evaluating how high the fluoride levels in water could be before visible, severe dental fluorosis occurred.

Now Dean remembered McKay’s claims that fluorosis victims mottled, discolored teeth were especially resistant to decay. He came up with the notion that fluoride added to the water supply at the magic threshold dosage of 1 ppm would prevent tooth decay, while avoiding damage to bones and teeth. He recommended further studies to determine whether his hypothesis was true.

Back at the Mellon Institute, ALCOA’s Pittsburgh industrial research lab, this news was galvanic. There, biochemist Gerald J. Cox immediately fluoridated some lab rats in a study and concluded that fluoride reduced cavities and that: “The case should be regarded as proved.”

In a historic moment in 1939, the first public proposal that the U.S. should fluoridate its water supplies was made not by a doctor, or dentist, but by Cox, an industry scientist working for a company threatened by fluoride damage claims and burdened by the odious expense of disposing of tons of toxic industrial waste (fluoride).

Cox began touring the country, stumping for fluoridation. Dean would go on to carve out a nice career for himself as the “father” of public water fluoridation. He became the first dental scientist at the National Institute of Health, advancing to director of the dental research section in 1945.

be well

Dr Sundardas D. Annamalay