can change the amount of cancellation allowed (the coefficient in Eq. (36)), altering the lower bound in Eq. (38) by O (50%). In Fig. 6 we show the SI cross section on the proton, the neutron and both as a function of m$_{A}$ for a 93 GeV neutralino with a thermal relic density of Ω$_{DM}$ h 2 = 0 . 1, σ p SD = 9 × 10 − 4 pb and σ n SD = 6 × 10 − 4 pb. One can clearly see that both contributions to SI DD cannot both be canceled simultaneously. At the minimum, σ min SI = 3 × 10 − 12 pb for m$_{A}$ = 751 GeV. For a shift in m$_{A}$ of ∼ 5%, the cross section becomes ∼ 2 × 10 − 10 pb – a change of almost 2 full orders of magnitude. This emphasizes the delicacy of the cancellation. Other than in the limited region where the cancellation occurs, the entire range is probeable by the next generation of SI experiments. Numerically, we find that for σ$_{SD}$ > 10 − $^{4}$pb, the smallest σ$_{SI}$ can be is O (10 − $^{14}$pb) where the suppression beyond the value in Eq. (38) is due to small mixing angles. Finally , we note that while these kinds of conspiracies are allowed, there is no reason to expect that the SUSY breaking parameters have anything to do with the nuclear matrix elements. We take this as evidence that such cancellations are unlikely. In this work we have explored the physics of SD DD with an emphasis on the correlations with SI experiments. In the process, we have determined some expectations for the SD cross sections. In particular, in the MSSM, $^{(}$σ SUSY SD ) < 6 × 10 − $^{3}$pb without making any assumptions about the thermal history. Again, allowing for a non-trivial cosmic history, but imposing the unified gaugino mass condition, we find $^{(}$σ SUSY SD ) < 4 × 10 − $^{3}$pb. Finally, $^{(}$σ SUSY SD ) < 2 × 10 − $^{3}$pb when a thermal relic density is imposed. These represent important targets for future experiments. If one includes the possibility of squark exchange, a SD cross section as high as 2 × 10 − $^{2}$pb can be reached for a neutralino which has a thermal abundance by utilizing the squark pole [64, 65]. We note that in the absence of light squarks, if SD cross sections larger than ∼ 6 × 10 − $^{3}$pb were observed, the DM would not be an MSSM neutralino. This would point to more exotic theories like the SDM or models with light mediators [66]. For models which reproduce the relic density, in the decoupling limit, and unified gaugino masses, a 1-ton COUPP-like experiment could probe the entire range of SD cross sections up to WIMP masses of O (1 TeV). More generally, we have argued that given the experimental constraints from LEP, neutralino DM is likely to be well-tempered with possible signals for the next generation of SI and SD DD experiments. In fact, any model (such as the SDM) which interacts with the SM via a light 24 VII. CONCLUSIONS