Difference between revisions of "Talk:Adult stem cells"
From Conservapedia
(embryonic stem cells have been led to more medical discoveries than adult stem cells? Hard to believe) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | |||
This article needs a category, but editing is locked. Might I suggest Category:Biology to one who can edit? [[User:WesleyS|WesleyS]][[User Talk:WesleyS|<sup>Hello!</sup>]] 14:55, 19 November 2008 (EST) | This article needs a category, but editing is locked. Might I suggest Category:Biology to one who can edit? [[User:WesleyS|WesleyS]][[User Talk:WesleyS|<sup>Hello!</sup>]] 14:55, 19 November 2008 (EST) | ||
:Article makes it seem like embryonic stem cells have been led to more medical discoveries than adult stem cells. This is precisely opposite to what I've been led to believe. Can someone help me source this? | :Article makes it seem like embryonic stem cells have been led to more medical discoveries than adult stem cells. This is precisely opposite to what I've been led to believe. Can someone help me source this? | ||
| + | |||
| + | This article is factually inaccurate. I will re-write it. Please let me know if there are any points that I need to clarify. --[[User:RudrickBoucher|RudrickBoucher]] 16:03, 27 November 2011 (EST) | ||
Revision as of 21:03, November 27, 2011
This article needs a category, but editing is locked. Might I suggest Category:Biology to one who can edit? WesleySHello! 14:55, 19 November 2008 (EST)
- Article makes it seem like embryonic stem cells have been led to more medical discoveries than adult stem cells. This is precisely opposite to what I've been led to believe. Can someone help me source this?
This article is factually inaccurate. I will re-write it. Please let me know if there are any points that I need to clarify. --RudrickBoucher 16:03, 27 November 2011 (EST)
