A talk on Genetic Disenhancement and Animal Welfare by Dr. Samuel Camenzind

Alexandra Piccio
May 22
3 min read

Dr Samuel Camenzind (Photos by Oliver Hirtenfelder)

On the evening of May 14th, the Vienna Animal Studies (VAS) group hosted a lecture by Dr. Samuel Camenzind of the University of Vienna. His talk, titled “Genetic Pain Surgery with Molecular Scissors,” presented the questions of ethics and science of genetic pain disenhancement in animals.

Dr. Camenzind began the lecture by playing John Lennon and Yoko Ono’s “Imagine”, reflecting on the lyrics’ description of a utopia which is free of religion, war, borders, or possessions. He emphasized the lack of pain or animals mentioned in the song, which led to the heart of the discussion–pain in animals. The lecture explored the possibilities of modern genome-editing techniques such as CRISPR/Cas9, which permit more precise and efficient genetic modifications. These tools are now being considered for a controversial use in animal welfare–the genetic reduction or elimination of animals’ ability to feel pain.

This new idea, called “Genetic Pain Disenhancement (GPD)”, suggests that by limiting animals' capacity for pain, we can reduce overall suffering in laboratory research, livestock farming, breeding, and more. But the reality of this development is much more complex, both scientifically and ethically.

The Science Behind the Concept

Dr. Camenzind introduced the audience to the process of genetic engineering, including “knock-outs” (removing genes), “knock-ins” (inserting new genetic material) and “multiplexing”, where multiple edits are made simultaneously. Despite public discomfort with the term "genetic engineering," specifically from liberal politicians, who want to avoid the term, he emphasized that these biotechnical methods are becoming more commonly accepted in the world of science.

Pain is defined by the International Association for the Study of Pain as an “unpleasant sensory and emotional experience associated with, or resembling that associated with, actual or potential tissue damage.” The GPD method is meant to preserve an animal’s typical behavior by selectively reducing the emotional part of pain without completely diminishing the ability to feel.

However, as Dr. Camenzind emphasized, a “pain-free” animal is still largely theoretical, and does not yet exist. He explained that certain examples from scientific literature—such as heat-insensitive mice or certain bird species immune to chili pepper—are compelling, but only selectively chosen in arguments in favor of scientific advancement. No actual model of a pain-free animal has been achieved to this day. Additionally, the concept of a pain-free animal was related to pain-insensitive humans to highlight the dangers of feeling no pain, including premature death and injury.

The Philosophical and Ethical Questions

A good amount of the evening focused on the ethical problems within the GPD project, which was greatly discussed and debated by the Vienna Animal Studies members. Questions arose, such as: is reducing pain an act of compassion—or merely another way to justify ongoing exploitation? Some lecture attendees argued that this approach “avoids the root of the problem”, allowing humans to continue manipulating animals for convenience or profit under the guise of compassion. Others questioned whether a world without pain is truly desirable, as pain plays a crucial evolutionary role: it protects the body, fosters learning and personal growth, and contributes to emotional depth. They argued that pain removal may come with unintended consequences—not only for animals, but also for our own morals in a philosophical context. Furthermore, philosophical objections were raised in the audience regarding the “reductionist approach” of much pain research, which often breaks down living beings into, simply, scientific subjects.

Utopia and Dystopia?

Slide from the lecture (Photo: Oliver Hirtenfelder)

The lecture concluded with a reflection on “utopian ideals”, circling back to the introduction. Dr. Camenzind used Thomas More’s “Utopia” to invite the audience to consider whether a pain-free world is an ideal we truly want and understand, or rather one we pursue without fully comprehending the consequences.

As the evening wound down with informal networking and discussion, it was clear that Dr. Camenzind’s talk was echoing in all of our minds. The conversation around GPD is not yet finished, in fact it is becoming more relevant with new technologies and consumer demands. This lecture opened the gates to more thought and conversation on the ethical questions and responsibilities associated with scientific innovations.