3 ms·
Unless something has drastically changed in the past 5 odd years, Actual Geneticists (tm) happily use GWAS in many investigations of complex traits. They're oft
by esyir 6y ago
Unless something has drastically changed in the past 5 odd years, Actual Geneticists (tm) happily use GWAS in many investigations of complex traits. They're often an early step in the overall pipeline in which they trawl for potential candidates for that target of interest, after which they go on to said more complex methods.
Why? You've already said so yourself. Those are expensive and tedious, and searching across the entire pool of human genetics with them is an exercise in futility.
- throwaway4666 6y agoThe important part in your post is >They're often an early step I think we're in agreement here, I'm just arguing that "woah, look at all those correlations" isn't a breakthrough or 'genomic revolution' in any sense of the word as far as our understanding of human genetics is concerned.
- hyperbovine 6y agoSeemingly, most of the complex traits for which GWA is an effective methodology (a few SNPs of large effect size) have already been discovered. More and more these days, I’m seeing association studies that fail to yield any hits. Whether this is due to sample size, polygenicity, or some other model failure remains to be seen.