GenomicsScienceTelegraph completely mangles debate over value of genetic researchBy Daniel MacArthurScienceGenome-wide association studies: failure or success?By Daniel MacArthurSciencePreparing doctors for the genomic tsunamiBy Daniel MacArthurSciencePredicting height: the Victorian approach beats modern genomicsBy Daniel MacArthurScienceEnrollment in Navigenics-Scripps study disappointingBy Daniel MacArthurScienceAGBT highlights: imprinted disease genes, rare variants, and a gene for crossword puzzles?By Daniel MacArthurScienceFree personal genomics... sort ofBy Daniel MacArthurScienceNavigenics' lame attempt at cut-price geneticsBy Daniel MacArthurSciencePersonal genomics customers: Case Western Uni wants youBy Daniel MacArthurScienceGene Genie #42 - focus on personalised geneticsBy Daniel MacArthurSciencePeering into the Genetic Future: trends in human genomics in 2009By Daniel MacArthurScienceThe promise and challenges of Big GeneticsBy Daniel MacArthurScienceThe diversification of consumer genomicsBy Daniel MacArthurSciencePersonal genomics in 2008: the year in reviewBy Daniel MacArthurScienceThe genetic architecture of metabolic traits: a data explosionBy Daniel MacArthurScienceWhere to look for regulatory variantsBy Daniel MacArthurScienceNavigenics to add gene sequencing to its personal genomic serviceBy Daniel MacArthurScienceBaldness genes: one old, one newBy Daniel MacArthurScienceDavid Goldstein on the failures of genome-wide association studiesBy Daniel MacArthurScienceWhy do genome-wide scans fail?By Daniel MacArthur