Abstract
Observational studies have consistently shown associations between mild deficiencies in folate and vitamin B12 with increased risk of a myriad of common diseases. These findings have invariably translated into null outcomes in intervention trials due in part to our ignorance of the specific genomic and environmental factors that underpin population variability in requirements to these B-vitamins. Although genome-wide association studies have shed initial light on the genetic architecture of variability in status of these vitamins, particularly vitamin B12, the causal mechanisms remain uncharacterised. A recent study by Grarup et al. (PLoS Genet 9(6):e1003530, 2013) used next-generation whole-genome sequencing to gain further insight into the genetic architecture of vitamin B12 and folate status in the general population. Their study represents the analysis of approximately ten times greater number of genetic variants and nearly four times the number of individuals compared to the largest previous GWAS study of these B-vitamins. In light of this, we purport that although the study may be viewed as the state of the art in the roadmap to personalised or precision nutrition, the lack of insight provided by the study serves as a cautionary reminder of the importance of study design, particularly when leveraging large-scale data, such as those from whole-genome sequences. We believe that the precedent set by such large-scale "proof of principle" type projects will wrongly enforce a negative outlook for nutrigenomics research and present alternative study designs, which although less opportunistic are far more likely to be informative and yield novel results.