Mr Paraskeva removing a gall bladder using the technique

A London surgeon is pioneering virtually scarless surgery to remove organs through the belly button.

Mr Paraskevas Paraskeva was the first surgeon in the UK to remove an appendix and gall bladder through the navel, using laparoscopic “key-hole” surgery.

Traditionally, these organs have been removed by making three incisions in the torso as well as the belly button - a process which leaves scars.

Mr Paraskeva is based at Imperial College London Healthcare NHS Trust.

The technique, known as single incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS), requires only a 10mm incision into the belly button (navel) to insert a “single access port” through which instruments and a small camera can be fed.

The organ is then pulled out using the instruments and the belly button is stitched up afterwards, leaving only the tiniest trace of a scar.

Speedy results

Using the technique, Mr Paraskeva can now remove an appendix in 20 minutes and gall bladders within an hour.

The surgery leaves virtually no sign of a scar

In both cases, the patient returns home on the same day as surgery.

Mr Paraskeva said: “This technique further minimises minimally invasive surgery.

“Having a single access port minimises the discomfort to the patient, reduces the risk of infection and because the incision is through the belly button, the surgery is scarless.”

The SILS technique was developed as a result of research undertaken by Mr Paraskeva and colleagues at Imperial.

Mr Geoffrey Glazer, a consultant general surgeon based at London’s Wellington Hospital, said: “This is a technological step forward which might appeal to certain groups who do not want two to three small scars on their abdomen.

“It might also help with the healing process.”

Mr Glazer said similar techniques were being developed to remove organs from the body’s natural orifices, such as the rectum.

However, removing organs through the navel carried less of a potential risk of contamination.

Geronimo was the most famous of the Apache warriors

US officials are seeking the dismissal of a lawsuit brought against the government by descendants of Apache leader Geronimo to recover his remains.

The descendants want to rebury Geronimo, who was buried in Oklahoma in 1909, in his native land in New Mexico.

They are also seeking the return of body parts they say were stolen in 1918 or 1919 by a secret society at Yale University known as Skull and Bones.

But justice officials say the law cited by the plaintiffs is not applicable.

In February, 20 descendants of Geronimo filed a lawsuit against President Barack Obama, Secretary of Defence Robert Gates and Secretary of the Army Peter Geren in their capacity as federal officials.

Their lawsuit, which also named Yale University and the Skull and Bones Society as defendants, alleged violations of a law passed in 1990 to protect Native Americans’ rights to the remains of their family members.

The lawsuit seeks the recovery of Geronimo’s remains “from 100 years of imprisonment at Fort Sill, Oklahoma, the Yale University campus at New Haven, Connecticut and wherever else they may be”.

This refers to long-standing allegations that members of the Skull and Bones Society, including Prescott Bush, the grandfather of George W Bush, broke into Geronimo’s tomb and stole his skull and other bones to keep in their clubhouse in New Haven.

Yale University has repeatedly said it does not have Geronimo’s remains and does not speak for the Skull and Bones Society.

The US justice department has now filed a motion asking a federal judge to dismiss the case.

Officials say the descendants’ complaint does not fall within the scope of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, as it does not claim that Geronimo’s grave has been disturbed or excavated since 1990.

Geronimo, who was born in what is modern day New Mexico in 1829, was the most famous Apache warrior.

He and his exhausted band of fighters surrendered to US forces in 1886. He died at Fort Sill on 17 February 1909 and was buried there.

The pilot took drastic action after realising help was a long way away

A helicopter pilot in Australia became so excited when he spotted a crocodile that he flew in for a closer look - and crashed into mudflats.

He suffered minor injuries, but his passenger was seriously hurt in the crash near the northern city of Darwin.

Concerned that his friend could get hypothermia, the pilot buried him in sand before raising the alarm.

Medical officials said doctors thought the man was dead - until they saw his head moving in the sand.

Air ambulance operator Careflight said in a statement that the pilot had been flying along the Dundee Beach, 60km (37 miles) from Darwin, when he tried to turn to look at a crocodile.

“The pilot said after starting the turn the next thing he remembered was being upside down in the mud,” the statement said.

“The pilot dragged his passenger to the safety of the shore, away from crocodiles, then buried the man in the sand up to his neck in an attempt to prevent his companion from developing hypothermia.”

The pilot then used his satellite phone to alert emergency services.

Ian Badham, director of Careflight, said the case was “bizarre”.

“A doctor thought initially the passenger was dead as he was buried in sand,” Mr Badham said.

“It turned out that the pilot had realised it might take rescue services until daylight to actually get there.”

Mr Badham said the passenger was being treated in hospital for head, chest and arm injuries.

A quiet revolution is engulfing tennis, as spectators and players say enough is enough to grunting. As Wimbledon begins, why is it that players are making so much noise?

For decades the familiar sound of a rubber ball striking the strings of a tennis racket has evoked memories of Wimbledon, long summer evenings and strawberries.

But as the world’s oldest tennis tournament begins in the sleepy London suburb, there are fears that some women’s matches now bear more of an aural resemblance to a torture chamber.

Some players accompany each stroke with such a loud and prolonged grunt/shriek that spectators and opponents have complained.

HISTORY OF GRUNTING 1974: Grunting pioneer Jimmy Connors wins first Wimbledon title 1988: Ivan Lendl complains about Andre Agassi at US Open 1992: Monica Seles spoken to by officials at Wimbledon 2005: Maria Sharapova’s grunt reaches 101 decibels 2009: Michelle Larcher de Brito receives unofficial warning at Roland Garros

Last month, the French Open witnessed a new high water mark in the grunting controversy, when 16-year-old Michelle Larcher de Brito was booed off court by the crowd. Portuguese player Larcher de Brito, whose grunt has all the aural elements of a wounded fox, was the subject of a complaint to the umpire by her French opponent. A Grand Slam official arrived on court but no action was taken.

Grunting has appeared like a boisterous and unwelcome guest in a sport steeped in etiquette since its genteel beginnings 150 years ago on a croquet lawn in Birmingham.

But it’s not a new development. As far back as the 1970s, Jimmy Connors was renowned for his noisy game, and Ivan Lendl complained about Andre Agassi’s expressive exertions putting him off at the US Open in 1988.

But, in what could be interpreted as a sexist backlash, it is only since women took up the habit that it has become much of an issue.

Monica Seles was one of the first female exponents, sparking complaints from Martina Navratilova at Wimbledon in 1992. There are even suggestions that her quieter demeanour in the final contributed to her thrashing by Steffi Graf.

Quiet please

At 101 decibels, Maria Sharapova is officially the loudest. Larcher de Brito’s noises - a YouTube hit - have yet to be measured but they seem to take grunting to a new level, one that is louder, longer and more high-pitched.

So why do players do it?

It benefits your game, says former British number one Jo Durie, although she thinks it can be done more quietly.

“It should be more like a breath coming out, without a noise attached,” she says. “It does help to exhale as you’re going to hit the ball because everything builds up and is then released when you hit the ball.

“We tell juniors when they strike the ball just to make a slight noise to help with their timing.

“It makes them concentrate on the timing of the stroke and gets the breath out of the body.”

When she was playing, reaching world number five in 1984, grunting was rarely heard, says Durie.

Most top players emit an indiscernible version, she says, but there are moments in a match when even the quietest players suddenly need to let off steam as they hit the ball. It could be a particularly powerful stroke, or the end of a long rally, or a tense point.

The problem now, she says, is that some players do it too loudly and for too long, and the noise is still ringing around the court when the opponent is trying to make the stroke. It’s still evident in the men’s game but it’s not as annoying.

“When men do it, I call it a grunt, but the women’s is a shriek. That’s the difference. The shriek is just so horrible. I can’t bear watching De Brito and sometimes I have to commentate on her matches. It’s horrible and off-putting.”

Durie does not believe it’s deliberate, just a habit that has developed, but other former players say it is damaging the women’s game.

The BBC’s face of Wimbledon, Sue Barker, says she has received countless complaints from spectators who say it is spoiling their enjoyment.

And Martina Navratilova, winner of 59 Grand Slam titles and a stoic non-grunter, believes it’s a diversionary tactic. She recently said that grunting was a form of cheating and should be banned, because it masks the sound of the ball on the racket - something that top opponents read to their advantage.

Grunting = exhaling

But Nick Bollettieri, seen by many as the world’s top tennis coach, and whose proteges include many of the noisiest players, says grunting is natural, not planned.

“I prefer to use the word ‘exhaling’. I think that if you look at other sports, weightlifting or doing squats or a golfer when he executes the shot or a hockey player, the exhaling is a release of energy in a constructive way,” says Bollettieri, speaking to the BBC News Magazine.

Breathing all the time and making noise can take your energy but overall it does help Nick Bollettieri

“If you hold your lips tightly, you’re not breathing and you become very tense and less flexible so you get tight more quickly.”

He runs a tennis academy in Florida and has worked with 10 players who have been ranked world number one, including Boris Becker, Agassi, Seles, Sharapova and Martina Hingis.

Players are not coached to grunt but to breathe properly, he says, and it should be done in a manner that’s constructive.

“Breathing all the time and making noise can [sap] your energy but overall it does help. It relaxes and releases energy.”

The reason why some manage to exhale without the noise is impossible to answer, he says, because no two players are the same.

It’s not an intentional distraction, he says, but if it is affecting opponents then something needs to be done. He even suggests the worst offenders should be docked points, even games and matches.

So what do the rules say?

These are primarily the responsibility of the world governing body, the International Tennis Federation which is based in Roehampton, south-west London.

Neither grunting nor any noise obstruction is mentioned in the rules, says a spokesman, and there are no plans to amend them.

The existing rules could be invoked if noise was distracting

On page 12 of the Rules of Tennis 2009, there is a section called “hindrance”, which says that if player is hindered by an opponent then he or she wins the point, unless it’s unintentional, in which case the point is replayed.

Venus Williams had a point deducted under this rule when her hair beads fell out in an Australian Open match in 1999. But it’s never been invoked to take action against a noisy player. Maybe now is the time.

“It’s always been at the discretion of the umpire, the whole issue of players grunting or shrieking or whatever,” says the ITF spokesman.

“In terms of the rules, an umpire must decide that a player was making unnecessary noise.”

If the decibel levels increase at Wimbledon during the next fortnight, then expect the officials to be all ears.

This is the biggest test Mr Rudd has faced since he was elected in 2007

An e-mail at the centre of opposition attempts to oust Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd is a fake, according to police.

The e-mail was purported to have been sent to a treasury official by Mr Rudd’s office, to help his car dealer friend get a government loan.

Opposition leader Malcolm Turnbull said the e-mail showed Mr Rudd had abused his position and must resign.

Analysts say this is the biggest test Mr Rudd has faced since he was elected.

Australian media have dubbed the affair “Utegate”, as the car dealer in question, John Grant, had lent Mr Rudd a “ute” - a two-seater pick-up truck - for use in his constituency.

Escalating row

Opposition politicians believe Mr Rudd tried to help Mr Grant secure money from a Treasury fund called OzCar to help his business cope with the global economic slump.

The row began on Friday, when Treasury official Godwin Grech told a Senate committee he thought he could remember receiving an e-mail regarding funding for the car salesman, but added he had no proof.

We have a treasurer who has used his considerable influence to get a favour for a mate. And not just any mate - a mate who is a benefactor of the prime minister Opposition leader Malcolm Turnbull

Police were called in to search Mr Grech’s home on Monday and specialists examined his computer equipment.

“Preliminary results of those forensic examinations indicate that the e-mail referred to at the centre of this investigation has been created by a person or persons other than the purported author of the e-mail,” the Australian Federal Police said in a statement on Monday.

The row forced a special session of parliament in which the two sides demanded resignations.

Mr Rudd had given Mr Turnbull an ultimatum to produce the e-mail in the parliamentary session, or resign.

“It is false, fake and a forgery. There can be no graver offence in public political life than to be in the business of communicating a document that is false, out there, through the media, in order to bring your political opponent down,” Mr Rudd said.

He told parliament the opposition had failed to provide the evidence so had “no alternative now but to stand up and apologise and resign”.

But Mr Turnbull mounted his own attack, telling parliament: “What we have here is a shocking abuse of power.

“We have a treasurer who has used his considerable influence to get a favour for a mate. And not just any mate - a mate who is a benefactor of the prime minister,” he said.

Shadow Treasurer Joe Hockey demanded Mr Rudd and Treasurer Wayne Swan should both stand down.

Mobiles and the net are hugely popular among young Iranians

As protests continue in Iran, details are emerging of the technology used to monitor its citizens.

Iran is well known for filtering the net, but the government has moved to do the same for mobile phones.

Nokia Siemens Network has confirmed it supplied Iran with the technology needed to monitor, control, and read communications.

It told the BBC that it sold a product called the Monitoring Centre to Iran Telecom in the second half of 2008.

Data inspection

Nokia Siemens, a joint venture between the Finnish and German companies, supplied the system to Iran through its Intelligent Solutions business, which was sold in March this year to Perusa Partners Fund 1LP, a German investment firm.

The product allows authorities to monitor any communications across a network, including voice calls, text messaging, instant messages, and web traffic.

It is understood that Iran uses the system to oversee the use of mobiles in the nation. Some information about protests in Iran outside the country was captured or sent via handsets.

Rather than simply block traffic and stop people reaching sites or services that the Iranian government does not want its citizens to see, the monitoring system can also interrogate data to see what information is being passed back and forth.

A spokesman described the system as “a standard architecture that the world’s governments use for lawful intercept”.

He added: “Western governments, including the UK, don’t allow you to build networks without having this functionality.”

Asked by the BBC about the firm’s attitude to doing business in Iran, Nokia Siemens said: “We do have a choice about doing business there, and on balance providing connectivity means there is a net benefit.”

He explained that millions of Iranians were getting mobile phone services through Nokia. “The amount of information that is coming out of Iran from ordinary users because they have connectivity that they would not have had before is of a net benefit to them.”

“I don’t think Iran would have expanded its mobile network and its connectivity to its citizens if it had not had this capability.”

Nokia Siemens markets the Monitoring Centre product to 150 countries around the world where it does business. The firm says it does not supply the system to China or to Burma.

The phone monitoring system sits side-by-side with the extensive net filtering system Iran has constructed in recent years.

Traffic in and out of Iran is largely controlled by Iran Telecom. On 13 June, the day after presidential elections, data traffic come to an almost complete halt, according to analysis by network security firm Arbor Networks.

Since then, traffic has gradually recovered, and analysts have speculated that the slowdown and re-start was caused by authorities putting in place filtering and monitoring systems.

Because Iran is effectively reading every message, this results in an inevitable slow down of traffic.

In mid-June, the OpenNet Initiative, which surveys net-watching efforts, updated its survey of net use in Iran and said the nation was: “investing in improving its technical capacity to extensively monitor the behavior of its citizens on the internet.”

It said women’s rights activists arrested in the nation had been shown transcripts of of instant messages they had sent.

“If true,” said the survey, the evidence, “would support the existence of an advanced surveillance program.”

There are more net users in China than US citizens

Google says it will take “all necessary steps” to remove pornography from its Chinese language portal, Google.cn

The firm was responded to criticism from China’s internet watchdog which said Google was “disseminating pornographic and vulgar information”.

Google has been warned twice about allowing unacceptable porn sites to be seen in search results.

The news comes as China tries to make sure all new PCs sold in the country are fitted with filtering software.

A popular outcry over the PC filtering plan prompted the Chinese government to clarify that, although the surveillance software will ship with every computer, it does not have to be used.

The Chinese government said its crackdown on Google - and other major websites - was to tackle the “large volume of foreign internet pornographic information [that] has entered our borders”.

Google responded in a statement, saying it had met with government officials to discuss issues surrounding its Google.cn service.

“We are undertaking a thorough review of our service and taking all necessary steps to fix any problems with our results,” said Google’s communications director, John Pinette, in a statement.

China’s Internet Illegal Information Reporting Centre (CIIRC) said further action may be taken.

According to the CIIRC, 1001 websites were blocked by authorities for “distributing porn and other lewd material” and more than 4,000 other sites were also closed.

At the end of 2008, the number of net users in China, which has a population of 1.3 billion, was almost the same as the entire population of the United States.

Only 50 bodies from the Air France crash have been recovered so far

Officials in Brazil have identified the first 11 of 50 bodies recovered from the Air France disaster in which 228 people died three weeks ago.

The bodies were those of 10 Brazilians and one male foreigner, officials said. They gave no further details.

The Airbus A330 plunged into the Atlantic on 1 June. The data recorders have not been found, and the cause of the crash remains a mystery.

Search teams from several countries are still scanning the search area.

Investigators are examining the bodies and debris at a base set up in the northern Brazilian city of Recife.

Five of the victims were identified as Brazilian men, five as Brazilian women and one as a “foreigner of the male sex”, local officials said on Sunday. The nationality of the foreigner has not been revealed.

DNA samples

Dental records, fingerprints and DNA samples were used to identify the bodies, a statement said.

Families of the Brazilian victims and the embassy in Brazil representing the foreigner’s home country have been notified, the statement added, but the identities will not be publicised in keeping with relatives’ wishes.

Debris from the plane is being brought back to Recife

Speculation about what caused the plane to go down between Rio de Janeiro and Paris has so far focused on the possibility that the airspeed sensors were not working.

The plane is known to have registered inconsistent speed readings just before it crashed in turbulent weather.

The plane’s “black boxes” can emit an electronic tracking signal for about 30 days and French-chartered ships are scouring the search area pulling US Navy underwater listening devices.

A French nuclear submarine is also involved in the search for the recorders, which could be up to 6,100m (20,000ft) deep, on the bed of the Atlantic.

US and Brazilian officials said on Sunday that so far no signals had been picked up.

Colonel Howard Richardson ditched the bomb off Tybee Island

More than 50 years after a 7,600lb (3,500kg) nuclear bomb was dropped in US waters following a mid-air military collision, the question of whether the missing weapon still poses a threat remains.

In his own mind, retired 87-year-old Colonel Howard Richardson is a hero responsible for one of the most extraordinary displays of aeronautic skill in the history of the US Air Force.

His view carries a lot of weight and he has a large number of supporters - including the Air Force itself which honoured his feat with a Distinguished Flying Cross.

But to others, he is little short of a villain: the man who 50 years ago dropped a nuclear bomb in US waters, a bomb nobody has been able to find and make safe.

‘Top-secret flight’

Shortly after midnight on 5 February 1958, Howard Richardson was on a top-secret training flight for the US Strategic Air Command.

It was the height of the Cold War and the young Major Richardson’s mission was to practise long-distance flights in his B-47 bomber in case he was ordered to fly from Homestead Air Force Base in Florida to any one of the targets the US had identified in Russia.

We thought maybe it was something from outer space, but it could only be another plane Colonel Howard Richardson

The training was to be as realistic as possible, so on board was a single massive H-bomb - the nuclear weapon he might one day be instructed to drop to start World War III.

As he cruised at 38,000 feet over North Carolina and Georgia, his plane was hit by another military aircraft, gouging a huge hole in the wing and knocking an engine almost off its mountings, leaving it hanging at a perilous angle.

At his home in Mississippi, Colonel Richardson said: “All of a sudden we felt a heavy jolt and a burst of flame out to the right.

“We didn’t know what it was.

“We thought maybe it was something from outer space, but it could only be another plane.”

The colonel thought his number was up. His bomber started plummeting to earth and he struggled with the flight deck to get any kind of response.

“We had ejection seats - I told ‘em: ‘Don’t hit the ejection seats just yet. I’m gonna see if we can fly.’”

As he dropped to 20,000 feet, he somehow got the damaged craft under control and levelled out.

He and his co-pilot then made a fateful decision which probably saved both their lives and the lives of countless people on the ground.

The B-47’s engine was left hanging from the plane

Colonel Richardson told me that the decision was instantaneous - and he still has no doubt it was the right thing to do.

They would ditch their nuclear payload as soon as possible in order to lighten the aircraft for an emergency landing and also to eliminate the danger of an enormous explosion when they made their unsteady arrival at the nearest available runway.

“The tactical doctrine for Strategic Air Command gave me the authority to get rid of it (the bomb) for the safety of the crew - that was the number one priority,” Colonel Richardson said.

He managed to direct the B-47 a mile or two off the coast of Savannah and opened the bomb doors, dropping the bomb somewhere into the shallow waters and light sand near Tybee Island.

He then managed a perfectly executed descent from which he and his crew walked away unscathed.

The pilot of the other aircraft, an F-86 fighter jet, also survived, after his ejector seat shot him clear of his aircraft.

I’ve been living with it now for 51 years Colonel Howard Richardson

Immediately after the crash, a search was set up to find the unexploded nuclear weapon, buried somewhere too close for comfort to the US’s second-largest seaport and one of its most beautiful cities.

Numerous other searches have followed, both official and unofficial, and each of them has also proved unsuccessful.

So the bomb remains tucked away on the sea-bed, in an area which is frequently dredged by shrimp fishermen, any one of whom could suddenly find that they have netted something a touch larger and scarier than a crustacean.

How dangerous the bomb is after all these years is a matter of hot debate.

The US Air Force insists it is safest to leave it wherever it is, and Colonel Richardson is adamant that it is incapable of a nuclear explosion because it lacks the vital plutonium trigger.

‘Practice mission’

He said these were routinely left out of the bombs used on training flights.

“This was just a practice mission. We were continually working out any problems, that’s why we had to practise - we wanted to be perfect,” he said.

But his case has been vigorously contested by opponents who raise apocalyptic fears of a thermonuclear explosion which could destroy much of the US eastern seaboard.

Fears have also been expressed that the bomb could be located and recovered by a terrorist group, and are even some who believe that may already have happened.

For Colonel Richardson, the event which shaped his life has not ended quite the way he thought it would.

“I’ve been living with it now for 51 years.

“We had an accident and I landed the aircraft safely… I did get a Distinguished Flying Cross from a general for that.

“I thought that would be the story. That’s not the story - everything’s about the nuclear weapon.”

Hear more from Gerry Northam on Broken Arrow, broadcast on Radio 4 at 2000 BST, Monday 22 June.

The Stig, a mystery driver who tests high-performance cars on Top Gear, has been “revealed” as Michael Schumacher.

The seven-times Formula 1 champion dressed as the show’s famous driver and removed his helmet during an interview with presenter Jeremy Clarkson.

However, an appalling driving performance by Schumacher at the end of the show cast doubt on the “revelation”.

Clarkson told viewers: “I don’t think Michael Schumacher is the Stig”.

The presenter had earlier revealed in his column in the Sun that Stig’s identity would be a “staggering surprise” to viewers.

“As a television moment, it’s up there with Neil Armstrong walking on the… corpse of JR Ewing,” he added.

Earlier, a BBC spokesman said: “As Jeremy said, in tonight’s Top Gear Stig will remove his helmet for the first time.”

After the show, a BBC spokeswoman would not confirm whether or not Schumacher was the genuine Stig, or a stunt to mark the first episode of a new series of Top Gear.

“You have to bear in mind that Top Gear is an entertainment programme. We never reveal who or what The Stig is,” she said.

But fans of the show remain unconvinced as to his identity. One fan, James2001, wrote on a Digital Spy forum: “You’re very gullible if you believe it really is him.”

Another fan, Mijath, said: “People’s fascination with the identity of The Stig mystifies me. Tonight’s unveiling was always going to be a joke, and a brilliant one it was.”

Peter Lawton, consumer editor of What Car? magazine told the BBC he thought it was “a nice publicity stunt”.

“I don’t think it was for real - it was good fun and nice to see Schumacher playing along,” he said.

He also said he knew who the real Stig was, but added: “My lips are sealed.”

Perry McCarthy, a former Formula 1 driver, was the original Stig, wearing black overalls for his appearances.

He was replaced with a new Stig, dressed in white, after he revealed his identity in his 2002 autobiography.