Many thanks to Ricardo Vidal for the logo!

The molecular level:

Daniel MacArthur at Genetic Future wrote about Genetics of gene expression in African-Americans: ominous news for personal genomics?

Alex Palazzo at The Daily Transcript analyzed 100 years of genetic research.

Greg Laden‘s submission was The Scientific, Political, Social, and Pedagogical Context for the claim that “Race does not exist.”

Larry Moran at Sandwalk talked about Genes and Straw Men

The clinical level:

Chavonne Jones at Human Genetics Disorders shared Muscular Dystrophy Gene Therapy Video:

The Daily Scan informed us about Breaking Cancer’s Gene Code.

Walter Jessen at Highlight Health focused on Potential Location of Autism Genes Identified and Gene Expression Can Predict the Survival of Lymphoma Patients.

The PHG Foundation posted about Helping physicians understand genetic risk and Epilepsy Phenome / Genome Project.

Grace Ibay at Genetics and Health published two interesting articles: Gene therapy research presents hope for sickle cell anemia and The genetic disorder that kept her from dancing.

Chavonne Jones at Human Genetics Disorders also shared a Wilson’s disease video with us:

The personalized genetic level:

The Navigenics Blog said Leading genomic researcher discusses his own test results.

Hsien-Hsien Lei at Eye on DNA unveiled Singapore Company DNA Dynasty Will (Not) Tell Your Children’s Future.

Do you know costs are plummeting for human genome sequencing?

The PredictER Blog focused on genetic privacy.

Daniel MacArthur at Genetic Future featured advice for doctors on dealing with personal genomics customers.

Read more about The Spitterati and Trickle-Down Genomics at the site of Center for Genetics and Society.

Blaine Bettinger at The Genetic Genealogist analyzed Familybuilder that announces DNA Testing.

Now: The rest of the genome (Herald Tribune).

Lygeia Ricciardi at Project HealthDesign asked “Would knowing your genes change how you act?“

And don’t miss the Book of Me.

The President level:

The Genetic Privacy of Presidential Candidates (New England Journal of Medicine):

Using genetic information to disparage opponents has no place in presidential campaigns. Nonetheless, the threat of genetic McCarthyism provides us with an opportunity to engage in a public dialogue about the limitations and complexities of using genomic information for decisions about life and health — including voting for our president.

Gene Screen: Will We Vote Against a Candidate’s DNA? (Wall Street Journal):

“DNA is not an issue in this campaign, but in the next campaign it will be bigger,” says George Annas, a leading authority on bioethics and human rights at Boston University. “It’s coming.”

If you want to host an issue of Gene Genie in 2009, let me know (berci.mesko [at] gmail.com). Don’t forget to submit your articles (berci.mesko [at] gmail.com).

And also check the Gene Genie blog out!