It is theoretically possible to create humans without pain perception through genetic modification, but it currently faces major scientific, ethical and practical challenges. The following is a step-by-step analysis： --- ### **1. Scientific feasibility** -**Key gene targets**: Certain genes (such as *SCN9A*, *SCN11A*) are known to be related to pain signaling. For example, *SCN9A*encodes the sodium ion channel Nav1.7, a mutation of which can cause congenital pain insensitivity (CIP), where patients cannot perceive pain but other sensations are normal. - * *Gene editing tools**: The use of CRISPR-Cas9, base editing and other tools can target and modify these genes to inhibit pain signaling. - **Animal model verification**: *SCN9A* has been successfully knocked out in mice, which has been shown to reduce pain sensitivity, but long-term side effects (such as abnormal autonomic nervous function) need to be evaluated. --- ### **2. Technical steps** 1. **Determine the target gene**: Give priority to genes that are specific to pain and have little impact on other physiological functions (such as *SCN9A*). 2. **In vitro experiments**: Test the efficiency and specificity of gene editing in cell models to ensure controllable off-target effects. 3. **Animal testing**: Construct gene-edited animal models (such as mice and non-human primates) to verify the effect of pain loss and potential side effects (such as wound healing and abnormal thermoregulation). 4. **Delivery system development**: Design safe vectors (such as adeno-associated viruses) to deliver editing tools to specific parts of the human nervous system. 5. **Human trials**: Conducted in stages, from local pain blocking (such as chronic pain treatment) to systemic transformation (subject to strict ethical review). --- ### **3. Ethics and Risk** -**Necessity dispute**: Pain is a survival protection mechanism, and complete elimination may lead to the accumulation of accidental injuries (such as internal bleeding and unconscionable burns). -**Unintended consequences**: The target gene may be involved in other physiological processes (such as *SCN9A* related to smell), and side effects need to be fully evaluated. -**Genetics and irreversible**: If germ cells are modified, offspring will permanently lose pain, which requires consensus from the international community. -**Social fairness**: It may cause controversy over “genetic enhancement” and exacerbate social inequality. --- ### **4. Alternative** -**Reversible intervention**: The development of drugs or optogenetic techniques to temporarily inhibit pain sensation, rather than permanent genetic modification. -**Precise pain blocking**: Only blocks pathological pain (such as chronic pain) and retains the early warning function of acute pain. --- ### **5. Realistic challenge** -**Technological maturity**: At present, the application of gene editing in the human nervous system is not yet mature, and the delivery efficiency and safety need to be broken through. -**Regulatory barriers**: Strict global restrictions on reproductive cell editing (such as the Declaration of Helsinki). -**Long-term effects unknown**: Lack of tracking of decades of human health data on genetic modification. --- ###**Conclusion** In theory, painless humans can be achieved through gene editing (such as knocking out*SCN9A*), but technical risks, ethical disputes, and long-term health effects need to be overcome. A more realistic path in the short term is local or reversible pain management, rather than permanent genetic modification. If it is promoted in the future, it is necessary to evaluate risks and benefits in combination with multiple disciplines under the international regulatory framework.