"controversial? Why are they controversial? What is the controversy surrounding these aspects? I don't want an essay or anything, but a concise and detailed description of these questions' answers would be appreciated.  

See my recent comments at Talk:Stem cell controversy  

I see that your comments were posted closer to the start of the year and that you do actually now support the change of name but were wanting feedback from certain parties. Could you please inform us if there have been any major objections to the name change from the MCB Wikiproject. If not I will probably make the changes in the next few days. Also I would like to see something along the lines of ""It is important to note that the moral objections made regarding the use of Embryonic stem cells does not apply to the use of adult stem cells. The best known use of adult stem cells is probably bone marrow transplants. This is a good example of the type of work already being done in this field that has effective results."" I'm not saying this is the exact wording I would like to see, but something is absolutely required to differentiate these two very different methodologies.   

No comments have been left so I have made the required changes. I have also added a quote by Prof Ian Wilmut.   

Additions/changes to external links
MOVED TO ITS OWN PAGE
 

Funny things said by funny people
Moved to WP:BJODN  
Wow...I'm...wow...speechless...wowowowow. I don't know what's worse...the content of this or the attrocious grammar/spelling. -'''' (talk, ) 

Amniotic fluid stem cells
with the discovery of amniotic fluid stem cells should 3 major types be changed to 4? Also it might be nice to have a short section on them.  

 Proposed external link - Stem Cells on PBS 
 Stem Cell Gold Rush - KQED-TV, Video & Resources

As per the page guidelines, I submit the above for inclusion  

Looks good to me.  

Random Question
Hi.  I am a rather biology noob, hopefully this question doesn't sound strange.  I am curious as to whether it is possible for stem cell creation to one day reach a peak where we can replace animal Slaughterhouse?  Forget about the economic factor for a minute.  Is it theoretically possible to feed a nation with meat that was grown 100% in a lab and not killed from any animal??  I had a thought that animals would benefit greatly from this.   
Um, you could grow either stem cells or non-stem cells in some sort of cell culture system for food, I guess, but it seems like a hideously expensive exercise & you would likely use animal or animal-derived products in their growth. The problem would still be the texture and the flavour''.
Realistically, it would be easier to feed everyone with soya flavoured to taste like meat. I've read that the entire underdeveloped world could be easily fed using the grain the US alone feeds its livestock (not sure if that's true though). Eating meat is costsly, and in vitro meat would be even moreso. The best way to save the animals would be to go vegetarian... but I still like a good steak.  
So you are saying there is never going to be an answer since taste and flavor can never be produced in a lab?  
Not never, just that I suspect that taste and flavour will be greater hurdles than growing cells. I don't see why it has to be stem cells that are grown as ""meat"" - actually you would be better off growing muscle cells, as it is the muscle (and some fat) that is what is in a typical steak.  

In this line:  ""In the future, medical researchers anticipate being able to use technologies derived from stem cell research to treat a wider variety of diseases including cancer, parkinson's disease, spinal cord injuries, and muscle damage, amongst a number of other impairments and conditions.""  NEWLIN