To answer some of your comments the source of information within our algorithm:

Although the application is slick and provides a simple red, yellow, green indication, under the hood is a sophisticated algorithm based on a patent-pending technology. Specifically, tawkon data is based on information extracted from the phone and reflecting its ongoing communication with cellular towers. The level of radiation a person is exposed to during calls is determined through an analysis of several dynamic factors.

The tawkon radiation indication for each phone model is tested in a RF chamber and calibrated to absolute radiation measurements.

More information about what tawkon does and the technology behind it at http://www.tawkon.com

We’re still optimistic that iPhone will take a leadership role in this matter, and in parallel we’re working on additional channels to get tawkon into the hands of mobile users worldwide including development on Blackberry & Android so stay tuned…

A special comment to Sanaa – health studies are not conclusive on exactly how and how much cellular radiation affects anyone, let alone pregnancy. You can see several independent articles here: http://www.tawkon.com/the-debate . However health studies do recommend keeping the phone at a distance from your body – not just your head. This is why even if you’re using bluetooth but the phone is on your lap, tawkon will sense (leveraging the iPhone’s embedded proximity sensor) that the phone is against your body and recommend that you distance the phone from your body – whether its your head, your lap or your belly.

“private api’s” is an excuse that apple can exert on many developers at any given time, if they choose. Like pulling all the WiFi finders…..bs

Bluetooth is also data carrier radiation in a waveform. It is a potentially just as dangerous radiation source.

The safest way is to use wired headphones while talking to the mic.

I am not a doctor, but as engineer I heard that water is considered a reasonably good insulator for absorbing RF in microwave range… so I’d presume that whilst the baby is still “inside”, all surrounded by water, is somewhat reasonably protected…

I would be much more concerned about unnecessarily having iPhone working in close proximity to the newborn when she/he is “out”…

(and definitely don’t give it to the baby to play as a toy, unless it’s in Airplane mode and all radios are switched off

HTH

If the software is using an algorithmic approach not based in reality and may very well be displaying nonsense results, is Apple so wrong for rejecting it? For the life of me, I cannot fathom how the results could be particularly accurate without a dedicated sensor.

“I can understand Apple rejecting useless and pointless apps, in fact I even thank them for that”

Bingo! The results displayed are no more than an educated guess and may very well be misleading.

Apple banned this app because it was using private APIs – developers have known since the beginning to stick with public APIs, so the developer has no one to blame but himself.

Apple is doing several things to cut back on the junk apps and apps which have the potential to create problems (such as using private APIs). This has nothing at all to do with Apple’s desire to publicize or hide radiation levels.

BTW, when radiation levels were measured, the iPhone was one of the lowest, if not the lowest, smartphones on the market.

The industry (and governments) in general pretend and maintain that it’s a “non-issue”… based on current methodologies used for assessing health risks from exposures it is “all safe”…
BUT there are serious reports that these very methodologies are NOT adequate – like:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19285839?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum

—