certainly apply – the Higgs boson mass is allowed to be larger: m$_{h}$ < 160 GeV. In Figs. 3, 4 and 5, we have plotted the max( σ p $_{SI}$, σ n $_{SI}$) vs. σ p SD for neutralino scattering with various restrictions. Note that these plots are made from independent scans and we have taken the scalar superpartners to be O (2 TeV). As discussed in Section II, we define “large” cross sections to be σ large SI > 5 × 10 − 9 pb and σ large SD > 10 − 4 pb, motivated by the projected near term range of current DD experiments. Hence, the shaded region delineates the (very approximate) reach of the next generation of SI and SD experiments. Note that this neglects the dependence of the sensitivity on the mass of the DM. The maximum for σ$_{SD}$ in Fig. 3 is given by Eq. (31) and for Figs. 4 and 5 is given by Eq. (35). In Fig. 3 we show points for both thermal and non-thermal neutralinos. This is our most general framework, and in this case it is clear that the correlation between the relevant mixing angles (and hence cross sections) is weak. By only allowing points which have a thermal relic density within ± 3 σ of the WMAP measurement (see Figs. 4 and 5), the correlation progressively improves. We will discuss this in detail in what follows. We will pay special attention to the m$_{H}$ → ∞ limit. In any theory with multiple Higgs bosons, a small SI signal can occur when the diagrams from Higgs boson exchange cancel against one another. Two important points should be made. First, this cancellation is often incomplete and typically cannot be realized for scattering off of both protons and neutrons simultaneously. Second, such a cancellation is a conspiracy – it requires unexpected relationships between parameters in the Higgs sector and nuclear matrix elements. The finer the cancellation, the greater the conspiracy (for further discussion of this cancellation, see Sec. VI C). If one takes the decoupling limit for Fig. 3, so that SI DD is determined by h exchange alone, the maximum SI cross section is ∼ 3 × 10 − 8 pb. Note that even for m$_{A}$ ∼ O (TeV) there can be nontrivial contributions for t$_{β}$ ∼ O (50) (see Eq. (22)). There is a negative correlation between fine-tuning and the size of DD cross sections (see Eq. (26)) [59, 60]. To emphasize this point, in Figs. 3, 4 and 5 we have marked points with | µ | < 500 GeV by blue dots and points with | µ | > 500 GeV by red crosses. The apparent feature around σ$_{SI}$ ≈ 10 − 8 pb in Fig. 4 is due to the finite range of m$_{A}$ taken in this scan ( m$_{A}$ < 1 TeV) – the points above this gap have constructive contributions from h and H while the points below have destructive contributions. There are a few interesting features in Fig. 5. The gap which extends along the entire plotted range of SD cross sections is due to a slight cancellation between the various contributions from the light Higgs boson (see Eqs. (19) and (20)) which can occur at finite t$_{β}$ ( t$_{β}$ < 50 in this scan). The small number of points around σ$_{SD}$ = 3 × 10 − $^{4}$pb is due to the opening of the top threshold (see Fig. 2). The behavior around σ$_{SD}$ = 2 × 10 − $^{5}$pb is due to the cross over from dominantly Bino to 17