Wired has a very good article on this.

Interesting that you should ask if there are any "don't look" areas. From the article:

This new age of genomics comes with great opportunity — but also great quandaries. In the genomic age, we will no longer have the problem of not knowing, but we will face the burden of whether we want to know in the first place. We'll learn what might be best for us in life and then have to reckon with the risk and perhaps the guilt of not acting on that knowledge.

For me, having more information is better. After all you always have to option of ignoring it. If you do not have the information, you do not have the option of using it. Having more options is better. This is both intuitively correct (for me) and supported by Game Theory.

But then again I have never suffered from guilt. Mistakes that I make are things that need to be corrected. Some actions are not "optimal", such as having fired food and two beers yesterday, but I do intentionally, are not mistakes. Simply something that I am willing to pay the price for. In neither case do I feel guilt.

Things like this remind me that despite how bad things are in the world and despite the very wrong direction many governments (especially those in the English tradition) are taking, many things are getting better. In some cases much better.

I agree about privacy. I'll wait until either there is a good anonymizing protocol in place or a home test kit. But this is a great first step.

The fact that any consumer with $1,000 can now capitalize on this project is a rare case of groundbreaking science overlapping with an eager marketplace.

We will see more and more of this. The prices will drop and there will be home kits. We are living in a Brave New World. It is largely up to us how we make use of it.