<p>Geneticization is a process of expanding genetics to define, predict, and possibly intervene in human conditions. Regardless of how and to what extent genetics has developed, theoretical reflection on the concept of geneticization which we call geneticization studies has an uneven history, and the interest in theoretically investigating geneticization has fluctuated over time. Our research question, therefore, is <i>how we should perceive the changing visibility, role, and conceptual utility of geneticization as a theoretical framework for reflecting on the expansion of genetics.</i> To answer this question, this article conducts a limited bibliometric analysis of publications on geneticization studies to examine the changes in research topics and the critical content of the geneticization framework. We categorized this uneven history into three phases with specific characteristics. Moreover, we identified an underseen distinction between informative and interventive forms of geneticization among geneticization studies. We argue that geneticization studies are not exhausted, and due to recent developments in genetics, as well as improvements in the capability of artificial intelligence, geneticization as a theoretical concept can still be fruitful for theoretical reflection. Thus, we introduce three new horizons to reconstruct and revise geneticization studies: medical humanities, philosophy of technology, and the ‘<i>gentle genetics</i>’ idea.</p>