Could be fairly significant. One of the problems with biology is that we have a lot of data in terms of experimental tests, but we don't know all the data mean.
Only a relatively small amount of the 30,000 human genes are clearly understood. And when you THINK you understand what it does, these genes can sometimes surprise by having other unexpected effects.
What his method seems to do, is to help map out what genes are related to each other. There are cases in cancer for example where we may know that ONE gene gets hyper-activated when a type of cancer is around. If you can correlate the activity of this active gene with other previously unknown gene, you get a better understanding of what causes the disease. If you know what causes the disease, you can use a variety of techniques (drugs, designed proteins, or RNAi) to inhibit the Gene's effects and stop the disease.
Only a relatively small amount of the 30,000 human genes are clearly understood. And when you THINK you understand what it does, these genes can sometimes surprise by having other unexpected effects.
What his method seems to do, is to help map out what genes are related to each other. There are cases in cancer for example where we may know that ONE gene gets hyper-activated when a type of cancer is around. If you can correlate the activity of this active gene with other previously unknown gene, you get a better understanding of what causes the disease. If you know what causes the disease, you can use a variety of techniques (drugs, designed proteins, or RNAi) to inhibit the Gene's effects and stop the disease.