The proposed project explores a new direction in our larger research on the use of human genetic variation studies in the search for biomedically related genetic markers. Broadly, the aim of the new add-on project and the original project is to understand how human genetic variation researchers operationalize the concept of "a human population." Together, these studies will provide empirical information that will help geneticists and bioethicists to understand whether there may be potential downstream social and biomedical consequences of different conceptualizations.

The NIH data access policy for genetic research provides enormous opportunities for genetic investigators but also raises a number of challenges for educating and recruiting participants into large-scale genetic research studies. The NIH released a final data access and sharing policy for genome-wide association studies (GWAS) in August, 2007. The policy requires specific phenotypic and genetic data from GWAS be deposited into a government controlled, limited access database.

Completing the Human Genome and the Human HapMap Projects has enabled studies associating genetic variation with complex diseases such as various cancers, coronary artery disease, and diabetes. This has led to the emergence of direct-to-consumer testing companies offering genomic profiling to inform individuals about their risk for dozens of diseases and traits. Such testing is being offered with the assumption that identification of an increased risk could lead to preventative measures to reduce a person's risk for developing disease or to improve disease outcome.

The relevance of genomics research for addressing health disparities between population groups is currently being debated. As a practical matter, if genomics hopes to have any role in reducing health disparities, its assumptions and goals will have to make sense to the communities involved. We know very little about what underserved and minority communities that are experiencing health inequities know and think about genomic research and health disparities, and how they might inform research plans if they were invited to discuss it. This project seeks to fill that gap.

It is recognized that research on the human microbiome is important for its potential scientific and medical impact. The complexity of microbiome research, however, could change the way that genetics is studied and understood because it calls for a more complex, nuanced framework for defining and demonstrating causality. The understanding of the human microbiome could also disrupt traditional assumptions about definitions of species, self, disease and normality. It is also recognized that microbiome research can raise ethical, legal, and social issues.

The mapping of the human genome has allowed researchers to discover new relationships between genotype and phenotype, and has provided the basis for genome-informed medical decision-making that will lead to diagnoses and therapies that are targeted, have reduced variability, maximize efficacy, and minimize adverse effects. As information of greater health significance is generated by genomic research, there is an emerging consensus that the ethical return of genomic information will be needed.

The ethical, legal, and social issues (ELSI) underlying the development and implementation of state-sponsored birth cohort studies and their accompanying biobanks are complex and potentially volatile. Michigan and other states, such as Connecticut and California, are in the midst of investigating and deliberating on how to set up biobanks and there is a pressing need for practical ELSI research and guidelines for these historic initiatives.

Rapid advancements in genetic technology, the popularity and coverage of genetics by the press, and the increased understanding of the role genetics plays in our health necessitates a basic understanding of the science for everyone. In spite of this increased exposure to genetics, a study by Bowling (2008) indicated that the public's genetics literacy remains relatively low. Studies looking specifically at the genetics knowledge of students in grades K-12 also show low levels of understanding.

The recruitment of American Indians and Alaska Natives (AI/AN) to participate in research is complicated by a long and troubled history between researchers and Native populations of the United States regarding the collection of Native American remains, cultural artifacts, and access to and use of natural resources, as well as health research. This history has led to widespread distrust and reluctance to participate in research.

Disclosing the prospect or discovery of genomic IFs to clinical patients or prospective research subjects is an area fraught with ethical, legal, social, and practical challenges. These challenges are being magnified with the advent of Genome Wide Association Studies (GWAS) and Chromosomal Microarray Analysis (CMA). The potential for identifying IFs and how this potential should be addressed for GWAS, CMA, and other genomic research and clinical applications is a novel prospect with which researchers, clinicians, research subjects, patients, and policy makers have limited experience.