The field of prevention science has been in the phase of demonstrating that gene by intervention (GxI) effect exist. This finding is inherently interesting, but prevention scientists will ultimately have to face the same questions that geneticists have faced: what are we going to do with this information? Just as psychiatric genetics has had to move beyond creating laundry lists of associated genes, prevention science will need to move beyond cataloging GxI effects. One could even argue that genetics is now passé, replaced by genomics (Feero & Guttmacher, 2014), epigenomics (Friedman & Rando, 2015), proteomics (Humphery-Smith, 2015), metabolomics (Bujak, Struck-Lewicka, Markuszewski, & Kaliszan, 2015), and the study of the microbiome (McDonald, Birmingham, & Knight, 2015). We now know that people respond differently to prevention intervention and that differential response is in part correlated with their genetic predispositions. What do we do with this information? Why is it important and how will it be used? It is not enough to say that genetic information may be used to help us understand what child will respond best to what intervention. Prevention scientists
