[HN Gopher] The effect of shingles vaccination at different stag...
___________________________________________________________________
The effect of shingles vaccination at different stages of dementia
Author : Archelaos
Score : 189 points
Date : 2025-12-05 17:47 UTC (5 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.cell.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.cell.com)
| travisgriggs wrote:
| Anyone skilled in the medical arts got a dumbed down synopsis of
| this?
|
| (I just had my first shingles vaccine 2 weeks ago)
| jvanderbot wrote:
| I'm not skilled, but it feels like a validation for the virus
| theory of dementia
|
| https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2025/03/shingles-vacc...
|
| "The remarkable findings, published April 2 in Nature, support
| an emerging theory that viruses that affect the nervous system
| can increase the risk of dementia. If further confirmed, the
| new findings suggest that a preventive intervention for
| dementia is already close at hand."
| inglor_cz wrote:
| A lot of things can cause dementia. IIRC, men who use Cialis
| have a lower risk of dementia, which indicates that better
| blood flow is beneficial as well.
|
| Our skulls are hard for a reason. Brains are sensitive.
| ortusdux wrote:
| The original study had a sample size of 10. A follow-up
| study with n = 13,000 did not find a correlation.
|
| https://www.alzheimers.gov/news/no-association-viagra-and-
| ci...
| Mistletoe wrote:
| Isn't it more accurate to say that people with pulmonary
| arterial hypertension had no dementia protection from
| viagra?
| _alternator_ wrote:
| I don't think that there are many things known to have as
| strong of an effect as HZ vaccines. The current evidence is
| that the vaccine eliminates like 20% of all cases,
| suggesting that HZ (aka chickenpox) is directly responsible
| for at least 20% of dementia cases, possibly much more.
| btilly wrote:
| Yes, many things can cause dementia. Repeated traumatic
| brain injuries can cause dementia.
|
| But the leading form of dementia is Alzheimer's. Somewhere
| in the order of 40% of us are expected to get Alzheimer's
| before we die. The list of things that have been
| demonstrated to cause Alzheimer's is much, much shorter.
|
| For the last 40 years, the leading theory about Alzheimer's
| is that it is caused by the beta-amyloid plaques that are
| found in the brain after death. This theory has produced
| exactly zero treatments that meaningfully affect clinical
| symptoms, despite many drug trial and literally billions in
| research per year. Seriously, between various sources,
| we've spent something like a quarter of what it cost to put
| man on the Moon. (It is hard to make a precise comparison,
| because a lot of that funding was private.)
|
| This single study represents more progress on effective
| treatments of Alzheimer's than all of that work combined.
| The importance of the result should not be dismissed.
| inglor_cz wrote:
| I didn't want to dismiss the results. Indeed, as you say,
| they are meaningfully better than everything that the
| amyloid theory was able to produce.
| DANmode wrote:
| Oxygenation and infection-fighting.
|
| Top defense.
| shepardrtc wrote:
| Taking valacyclovir should help prevent or delay as well.
| red-iron-pine wrote:
| aye. is likely the reason Trump's hands are showing serious
| bruises and band-aids; regular treatments to keep him from
| losing it
| giardini wrote:
| I think the bruises are from pounding his desk in
| frustration.
|
| And WTF is wrong with wearing a Band-Aid? _You 're
| criticizing someone for wearing a f**ing Band-Aid!?* Are
| you nuts?! [pounds desk] Whassamattayou? Can't you stick
| to the point instead of talking about f**ing Band-Aids?*_
| John7878781 wrote:
| > But the first clinical trial to test that theory has
| found that a common antiviral for herpes simplex
| infections, valacyclovir, does not change the course of the
| disease for patients in the early stages of Alzheimer's.
|
| https://www.cuimc.columbia.edu/news/antiviral-treatment-
| fail...
| shepardrtc wrote:
| Yeah they looked at 120 people age 71 and above for that
| study. By that point its a little late.
| shadowgovt wrote:
| Perhaps worth noting because I'm not sure how many people
| realize it:
|
| Chickenpox is actually a neurological disease; that's how it
| re-emerges as shingles later in life. The virus infects nerve
| cells but (as far as we know) hides out in them without
| damaging them. Because nerves are critical to bodily function
| and don't regenerate nearly as efficiently as (for example)
| skin, liver, or other "sheet tissues" (tissue made of small
| cells is easier to regenerate; nerves can be as long as a
| meter and regeneration involves growing a new cell that
| entire distance), the body has a pile of immunosuppressant
| signals to prevent killing the nerve while trying to fight an
| infection. "Hey white blood cells: I know we hate chickenpox,
| but we hate _not being able to swallow_ more, so maybe lay
| off the throat nerves, right? "
|
| ... but as a result, one doesn't generally purge the
| chickenpox infection after it occurs. Breakouts into other
| tissue are swiftly suppressed by our immune systems our whole
| lives (so swiftly that you don't get symptoms or become
| contagious), but as we age and the immune system weakens, a
| breakout can become a full infection and the result is
| shingles.
|
| ... and now, it seems that the "infects nerves without
| damaging them" hypothesis should be up for question.
| hannob wrote:
| It looks like the shingles vaccine has positive effects that
| prevent dementia. (Well, that's in the title.)
|
| This study was possible due to a "natural experiment" where one
| country gave people from a very specific birth date the vaccine
| (so people born right before and right after that date were
| very similar, except for the vaccine).
|
| It's not clear why this is the case. It might be that the virus
| the vaccine supresses plays a role in dementia development, or
| it might be that the vaccine causes an immune response that has
| other indirect positive impacts.
| jibal wrote:
| Statistics show that in some populations there is less dementia
| among those who received the shingles vaccine than among those
| who didn't.
| busyant wrote:
| This is probably a key sentence: "...the effect of actually
| receiving the HZ vaccination was a 3.1 (95% CI: 1.0-6.2, p =
| 0.007) percentage point reduction in new diagnoses of MCI over
| 9 years."
|
| MCI = mild cognitive impairment
|
| What's interesting to me is that the effect doesn't appear to
| be specific to Alzheimer's--rather they see a reduction in all
| forms of dementia diagnosis.
|
| I suspect the thinking is something along the lines of ...
| dementia is either caused or heavily influenced by
| inflammation. Reactivation of HZ virus causes neurological
| inflammation. So, HZ vaccination is gonna prevent some forms of
| inflammation and help you avoid dementia--a little bit.
|
| FWIW, I'm trained as a molecular biologist and have a some
| knowledge of clinical trials, dementia, etc., but I am _far_
| from an expert on this.
| _alternator_ wrote:
| The highlights are a good start. (I'm a doctor, just a nerd who
| likes to read papers.)
|
| My comments in brackets.
|
| - Herpes zoster vaccination reduced dementia diagnosis in our
| prior natural experiments. [Previous work. I'm familiar with
| the Wales experiment where they had a sharp age cutoff for
| getting the vaccine in their national health system. Comparing
| those just below and just beyond the cutoff allows for analysis
| similar to a randomized controlled trial (aka 'natural
| experiment'). The results showed a ~20% decrease in dementia
| due to vaccine, so the results were already pretty strong.]
|
| - Here, we find a lower occurrence of MCI and dementia deaths
| among dementia patients [MCI = 'mild cognitive impairment'.
| This is a more refined result than prior work, harder to see in
| the data than a clear dementia diagnosis.]
|
| - Herpes zoster vaccination appears to act along the entire
| clinical course of dementia. [This is not surprising given the
| earlier results, but the demonstration is harder, and it may
| lead to recommendations for earlier HZ vaccination, IIRC
| currently at 50 or 55 in the US.]
|
| - This study's approach avoids the common confounding concerns
| of observational data [Basically they are improving their
| methods and getting stronger results, classic good science.]
| jjtheblunt wrote:
| Months ago when this research was showing up (not on HN)
| there was a disclaimer that the benefit differed for Shingrix
| vs Zostavax (discontinued in the United States around 2017),
| and that Zostavax was shown to cause these benefits (Wales
| study for example).
|
| Shingrix had a potential side effect of Guillain-Barre
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guillain-
| Barre_syndrome#Vaccin...
|
| It's interesting that the linked article references, in
| different terms, the distinction, obliquely. Zostavax is
| attentuated; Shingrix recombinant.
|
| "Our findings suggest that live-attenuated HZ vaccination
| prevents or delays mild cognitive impairment and dementia and
| slows the disease course among those already living with
| dementia."
| botro wrote:
| Is it known or suspected whether Shingrix offers the same
| benefits as Zostavax for dementia?
| jjtheblunt wrote:
| I haven't yet seen that result asserted, but maybe others
| have.
| kieranmaine wrote:
| From article https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2025-06-25-how-do-
| vaccines-reduce-...
|
| > Recent studies have shown convincingly that vaccines
| against shingles (Herpes zoster) reduce the risk of
| dementia. The shingles vaccine now in widespread use
| (Shingrix) has more of an effect than the previous one
| (Zostavax). A key difference between these vaccines is
| that Shingrix contains an 'adjuvant', an ingredient
| designed to enhance the vaccine's effect. It is therefore
| possible that the adjuvant contributes to Shingrix'
| greater effect than Zostavax on reducing dementia.
|
| Link to study
| https://www.nature.com/articles/s41541-025-01172-3
|
| I don't know if this study changes the conclusion that
| Shingrix is more affective than Zostavax.
| jjtheblunt wrote:
| interesting...thanks for sharing that!
| _alternator_ wrote:
| Sorry, I just realized the typo but I can no longer edit: I'm
| _not_ a doctor, just a nerd. I blame my phone and my own
| crappy copy-editing. I hope this didn't confuse too many of
| you.
| hedora wrote:
| Shingles attacks your nervous system. Avoiding shingles
| prevents it from damaging your brain, so it isn't surprising
| the vaccine reduces dementia.
|
| There are multiple causes for dementia. If I read figure 2
| right, the vaccine slightly reduces the chance of mild
| cognitive impairment, but cuts the chances of dying from
| dementia by about a third(!)
|
| Also interesting: The vaccine helps at different phases of
| disease progression.
|
| The simplest explanation is that dementia is due to cumulative
| damage, not a single event, and that getting shingles is a big
| hit.
|
| The vaccine probably prevents dementia in the same way staying
| out of planes makes you invulnerable to parachute failures.
| jtbayly wrote:
| A lot of dead BASE jumpers disagree...
| _alternator_ wrote:
| The emerging evidence, taken together, shows a ~20% reduction
| in dementia over 7 years. So it's actually pretty dramatic.
| https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2025/03/shingles-
| vacc...
| wdb wrote:
| What do they mean with 'dying from dementia'? As typically
| you don't die from dementia but something like pneumonia or
| something else. Personally, I wouldn't wish dementia on
| anyone and definitely wouldn't want to extend my life while
| having dementia.
| jjtheblunt wrote:
| not eating is an example, i believe, from my father who had
| chemo induced neurotoxicity predicted well over a decade
| earlier.
| dd8601fn wrote:
| Too bad you can't get it until you're over 50 or
| immunocompromised.
| cess11 wrote:
| Why not?
| gorfian_robot wrote:
| good question. but that is how it is in the US and MX.
| singlow wrote:
| I think you can if you self pay, but insurance only pays in
| certain circumstances.
| mlinhares wrote:
| I tried and they won't give me. Gonna ask my primary care
| to request it.
| onair4you wrote:
| I'm more worried that by the time I'm 50 it will no longer be
| available...
| swatcoder wrote:
| It's not been formally evidenced as beneficial in younger,
| healthy people (there just haven't been studies) so receiving
| it is "off label".
|
| It's _possible_ to find someone who would write a
| prescription for it anyway, as with many off label
| prescriptions with low perceived risk of harm, but insurance
| is unlikely to cover it.
|
| Many/most doctors won't do that, though, especially without
| at least _some_ kind of specific reason (like having
| recurrent cases already).
| kiba wrote:
| "Low risk" unfortunately doesn't mean no risk. I wish to be
| vaccinated against all disease, but rationally I must
| acknowledge very low probability event of harm from
| vaccination. It's why they're recommended only for 50 and
| older.
| brendoelfrendo wrote:
| As someone who got shingles in his 30s, it seems weird that
| a vaccine requires formal evidence to be beneficial to a
| younger population. Are there known side-effects that might
| outweigh the benefits? Shingles sucks at any age, making
| people wait to get the vaccine just because shingles is
| more common in the elderly seems odd.
| swatcoder wrote:
| I also had it in my 30's (and now again in my 40's) so I
| get it.
|
| But there's a whole "evidence based medicine" thing that
| many of us _usually_ try to champion, and it turns out
| the collecting such evidence is something expensive and
| priority-constrained. Due to lack of suitably targeted
| studies, there 's just not formal _evidence_ that the
| vaccine will be effective or lasting for us, or on what
| risks might apply to younger people with more robust
| immune systems.
|
| There's also just a consideration about rationing the
| drug itself (it's seen shortages), and so prioritizing
| availability to more at-risk populations is not totally
| unreasonable.
|
| All that said, it's not like it's impossible or illegal
| to get. You just need to find a prescriber who'll sign
| off for it (they exist), and you _might_ need to pay cash
| rate for it at the pharmacy.
| dghlsakjg wrote:
| > As someone who got shingles in his 30s, it seems weird
| that a vaccine requires formal evidence to be beneficial
| to a younger population. Are there known side-effects...
|
| We don't know the side effects or the beneficial effects
| since it hasn't been studied/approved for that (we likely
| have studied it, but not with enough rigor for FDA
| approval). It is, in all likelihood, fine, but when it
| comes to medication, we typically want a study rather
| than a guess.
| loeg wrote:
| It's just the usual FDA conservatism only for
| interventions (status quo bias).
| loeg wrote:
| It was less expensive to study in older populations because
| they get shingles at higher rates, so it was only studied in
| older populations. That's all.
|
| Early on there were also arguments that supply was limited,
| so the age minimum was to restrict supply to those who could
| benefit the most (frail elderly). But that ship has long
| sailed.
| uxjw wrote:
| I'm 42 in Canada and just got the first shot yesterday. Doctor
| prescribed it because I'm getting psoriasis and I guess that
| puts you at a higher risk of developing shingles. With the
| prescription, it was fully covered.
| DANmode wrote:
| More specifically, a person presenting with psoriasis has
| already been at higher risk.
| robocat wrote:
| Presumably if you were vaccinated as a child against chickenpox
| (Herpes Zoster) and didn't get chickenpox then you already have
| the protection.
|
| There are no dementia statistics versus vaccination for that
| demographic because vaccination started about 1995.
|
| There is also a relevant XKCD: https://xkcd.com/1950/
|
| If you are thinking that dementia is caused by shingles, then
| also consider that shingles is caused by chickenpox.
| _dain_ wrote:
| is this a regional/country thing? I'm 30 and I never got
| chickenpox vaxx, and I never heard of anyone getting such a
| thing growing up. but I also never heard of anyone getting
| chickenpox either when I was a kid. it just wasn't a thing? I
| only knew about it from american cartoons.
|
| not an antivaxx community, people got MMR and HPV and tetanus
| vaxx. this was normalworld suburban britain. I didn't even
| know there was a chickenpox vaxx until now.
| AndrewDucker wrote:
| NHS has been refusing to vaccinate against chickenpox for
| many years. Finally changed its mind in the last year or
| two.
|
| (Got both of my kids (5&7) vaccinated privately. Don't
| regret it at all.)
| _dain_ wrote:
| _> NHS has been refusing to vaccinate against chickenpox
| for many years._
|
| what the fuck. why?
|
| god damn I hate rNHS national cult. better get myself
| vaxxed to undo this idiocy.
| AndrewDucker wrote:
| I believe the worry was twofold:
|
| 1) That people who couldn't be vaccinated would get the
| virus later in life (because it would be less common),
| when it's a much more serious illness.
|
| 2) That there was a protective effect against shingles
| from having people regularly encounter the disease by
| encountering children with chicken pox.
|
| But it turns out that the latter isn't actually an issue.
| _dain_ wrote:
| wtfff
|
| are there more vaccines they're hiding from us?
| mckn1ght wrote:
| Apparently, while it is currently available to certain
| people in the UK, the chickenpox will only become generally
| available to children starting next year:
| https://www.gov.uk/government/news/free-chickenpox-
| vaccinati...
| _dain_ wrote:
| britain is a developing country
| _dain_ wrote:
| fly to a 2nd or 0th world country and pay a doctor to do it
| CrossVR wrote:
| I wonder when we'll finally accept that there's no such thing as
| a harmless latent disease. Chickenpox, EBV, HPV, they're all
| associated with either neurodegeneration or cancer.
|
| We should be vaccinating kids against all of them rather than
| sending them to Chickenpox parties.
| matthewdgreen wrote:
| I looked into a chickenpox vaccine a while back, but it turns
| out the current varicella vaccine uses a live virus. So if
| you're fortunate enough not to have been exposed to chickenpox,
| taking the vaccine could put it into your body. The Shingles
| vaccine, on the other hand, has no live virus at all. But you
| can't get that til 50.
|
| ETA: Since someone downvoted this: I'm not criticizing
| vaccination, and you should absolutely get your kids
| vaccinated! But for someone (like me) at the age where you've
| seen friends with Shingles (ugh), adding live chickenpox virus
| to your body feels like a risky idea, even before this news.
| wesleywt wrote:
| Its an attenuated vaccine, which means it was grown to be
| weaker then the wildtype by growing it in non-human cells
| making it more specific to what it was grown in. I have never
| had chickenpox because i had the vaccine. If had chickenpox
| as a child you were extremely unlucky because its completely
| unnecessary.
| hedgehog wrote:
| It depends how old / where, the US didn't start vaccinating
| widely until around 30 years ago.
| stvltvs wrote:
| We didn't have this new-fangled chickenpox vaccine during
| my Gen-X childhood.
| hedgehog wrote:
| Or a lot of millenials. My parents were annoyed we had to
| go through it while Japan had been vaccinating since the
| 80s.
| triceratops wrote:
| > But you can't get [the shingles vaccine] til 50
|
| This is inaccurate. I know several people who got it younger
| than that after contracting shingles and recovering.
| CocaKoala wrote:
| More specifically, it's highly doctor-dependent. The FDA
| hasn't approved shingrix for people under 50; some doctors
| are willing to prescribe it without FDA approval, others
| are not. I personally had shingles in my early thirties and
| have thus far been unable to have my doctor prescribe
| shingrix.
|
| Also, I would like to point out that having shingles was
| possibly the single most physically unpleasant experience
| of my life and boy it sure would have been fantastic to
| have been able to get the shingles vaccine before I got
| shingles, as opposed to sometime after! because wow, having
| shingles sucks.
| ceejayoz wrote:
| This also means you may have to pay for it out of pocket,
| rather than having it covered by insurance.
| bink wrote:
| > some doctors are willing to prescribe it without FDA
| approval
|
| But the pharmacies are still reluctant to administer it.
| My doctor prescribed it for me but when I got to the
| pharmacy they made me fill out some forms... because I
| checked the box that said I had no serious health issues
| and I was under 50, the pharmacist absolutely refused to
| administer it even with a prescription.
| amluto wrote:
| We will start finding out whether people who got the
| varicella vaccine instead of chicken pox get shingles at a
| similar rate soon -- the older members of this population are
| approaching shingles age.
|
| Here's a study that looks good:
|
| https://academic.oup.com/jid/article/226/Supplement_4/S470/6.
| ..
|
| The headline conclusion is:
|
| > Latent VZV can be wild-type VZV (wt-VZV) from natural
| infection, vaccine-strain VZV (vs-VZV) from immunization with
| live attenuated vaccine, or both. Based on available data in
| children and adolescents, the risk of HZ from vs-VZV appears
| to be approximately 80% lower than the risk from wt-VZV, with
| a lower incidence found in 2-dose as compared to 1-dose
| vaccine recipients [9, 10].
|
| A major caveat is that the relevant age groups were very much
| too young for shingles vaccines at the time the study was
| published.
| mickdarling wrote:
| The age gating of needing to be 50 years old to get the
| shingles vaccine is really obnoxious. I had shingles
| outbreaks twice in my life, one in my early 30's and once at
| 48. Obviously, both before 50 years old.
|
| I had to argue with my doctor to prescribe the Shingles
| vaccine at 49. And when I had it in my 30s, nobody even
| bothered to give me any antivirals, which did exist at the
| time, or nerve pain relief.
|
| After I had the shingles vaccine, nerve pain that I'd been
| suffering with every time I got the slightest little allergy
| or cold suddenly disappeared, and I haven't had it since more
| than a year later.
|
| If you are under 50 years old, and had chickenpox, and
| especially if you've had one outbreak of shingles, force your
| doctors to prescribe the vaccine. It costs $100-$200 without
| insurance coverage, and it is worth it.
| EvanAnderson wrote:
| I'm 48, in the US, and had chicken pox as a child.
|
| After my 43 y/o sister-in-law had a debilitating shingles
| outbreak last year I asked my PCP about the vaccine. He
| stated that he was wary to prescribe it to be. His
| reasoning was something like:
|
| There was a previous shingles vaccine that didn't work very
| well. It was found that it didn't offer long-term
| protection and the protection could not be improved with a
| booster. The current vaccine is still new and the long-term
| protection and ability to be extended by a booster are
| unknown. Since most of the worst outcomes of shingles
| correlate to old age it makes sense to defer the
| vaccination hedging against the failure of the vaccine to
| provide long-term protection and to allow more time to
| elapse to learn more about how the vaccine works long-term.
|
| Edit: My PCP's general advice was to defer the vaccination
| as long as possible. He felt that 60 was reasonable.
|
| I haven't looked into the veracity of any of his reasoning,
| but I am willing defer to his expertise and bide my time.
| My sister-in-law had a really bad experience, and I
| remember my grandfather having a terrible experience when I
| was a child. I'm definitely fearful and would like to
| prevent it.
| mickdarling wrote:
| That's your reasoned choice. I wasn't given that
| opportunity to make that choice. Most people aren't given
| that choice. That's my complaint.
|
| Especially when the delta is less than one year. That's
| just quibbling.
| EvanAnderson wrote:
| I didn't mean to imply my choice was good or bad and to
| make any value judgement about your circumstances. I'm
| sorry if it seemed that way.
|
| The age restriction seems obnoxious to me, too. I'd love
| to gather criticisms of this reasoning with citations
| that I can take to my PCP. It gives me the willies
| rolling the dice with this. I would much rather get the
| vaccination now but I also see his point. (I'm entirely
| too much the layman to go out looking for studies about
| the long-term protection of this current vaccine.)
|
| re: the delta - He was advising me to defer the
| vaccination as long as possible. I'll edit my note to
| reflect that. Quibbling about a year is silly. He advised
| waiting until at least 60.
| Izikiel43 wrote:
| > If you are under 50 years old, and had chickenpox
|
| I'm 2 out of 3, any info on that scenario?
| brandensilva wrote:
| I ended up getting shingles when I was 17. Terrible and
| rare I heard but for the most part I've never had any major
| outbreaks since then.
|
| I wasn't aware the shingles vaccine starves off nerve pain.
| I've noticed more nerve pain with pins and needles and
| neuropathy now that I'm 41 which I assume is what you are
| talking about. I used to think I was getting pre-diabetic
| before this as I wasn't aware of nerve flare ups being a
| thing given how young I was when I found out.
|
| Has there not been any studies around this with those with
| shingles taking the vaccine and freeing them from their
| symptoms? First time I've heard this.
| ikrenji wrote:
| I don't understand this kind of reasoning. You don't think
| that the 100s of PhDs that worked on this would have
| accounted for the riskiness of adding a live chickenpox virus
| vs not adding it? People need to start trusting experts more
| and do less of "common sense" over-thinking imo.
| dylan604 wrote:
| I feel a lot of people think the "experts" are conniving in
| their offices rubbing their hands together thinking up ways
| to be diabolical.
| echelon wrote:
| Most of the herpesvirus family have associations with
| neurodegenerative disorders, also including HSV.
|
| A lack of oral hygiene and gum disease is associated with
| nerodegeneration.
|
| Lots of metabolic diseases have associations with
| nerodegenerative disorders. Insulin, kidney, liver dysfunction.
|
| The gut microbiome...
|
| Putting immune or metabolic stress on the brain can cause it to
| go into this disease state death spiral.
| loeg wrote:
| > A lack of oral hygiene and gum disease is associated with
| nerodegeneration.
|
| It's important to remember that association/correlation is
| not causality. People who brush their teeth reliably are
| probably more likely to exercise and do other healthy
| behaviors, too (avoid smoking, ...).
| dv_dt wrote:
| It's also very possible to practice great oral hygiene and
| have bad gum disease. Gum disease seems to be carried by a
| potentially strong genetic risk factor.
| echelon wrote:
| As nice as this statistical thinking alone is, it can also
| slow things down.
|
| There's a reason why this finding is valuable. It suggests
| a mechanistic hypothesis that bacteria are entering the
| bloodstream, heart, and passing the blood-brain barrier.
|
| This is a very valuable line of investigation that can lead
| to a smoking gun for one class of casual mechanisms and
| potentially to preventative care or treatment.
|
| If we blindly follow just the statistics, we'd never get
| any real science done.
|
| Correlation does not imply causation. But when it gives you
| something to investigate, don't sit on it.
| tzs wrote:
| That's been studied and the evidence suggests that there is
| some causation. Bacteria that cause your gum disease can
| get into the bloodstream and reach the brain, where they
| release enzymes that cause inflammation and can damage
| cells.
|
| In particular this can seriously impair microglial cells
| which is something you really don't want to have happen if
| you value maintaining a well functioning brain.
| loeg wrote:
| There's a hypothesized mechanism, but again, no actual
| demonstration of causality. No one is RCTing brushing
| teeth, for obvious reasons.
| losvedir wrote:
| > _We should be vaccinating kids against all of them rather
| than sending them to Chickenpox parties._
|
| We do in the US. I was kind of surprised when my now 2 and 4
| year olds were vaccinated against Chickenpox, since I remember
| doing the Chickenpox party thing myself when I was younger
| (staying home with some friends over, playing Daytona USA on my
| Sega Saturn, I think?).
| rootusrootus wrote:
| > We do in the US
|
| For now. The current administration is chipping away at child
| vaccines, just today removing Hep B vaccine from the
| recommendations list. AFAICT you can still choose to get it
| for your kid, and insurance should still cover it, but I
| won't be the least bit surprised if before 2028 some of these
| vaccines are actually banned outright.
| codyb wrote:
| This administration does appear to be flaming out a bit at
| least. Seems like there's a chance the Dems take the House
| before the 2026 midterms. I think there's a chance Trump's
| term ends early.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| I've speculated for a while that what he does is so over
| the top and frequently self-destructive that I wonder if
| he's actually _trying_ to get kicked out.
|
| But while I agree that there's a chance, I think it's
| vanishingly small. I do hope that the dems can take the
| house in the midterms and put the brakes on the massive
| expansion in executive power.
| rjp0008 wrote:
| The cynic in me things the Dems take the legislative
| branch next year, curtail executive power but are unable
| to undo anything and then win a massively nerfed
| executive position in 2028.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| I'm with you. I also think it would not take long before
| we all found out that the Supreme Court only embraces
| limitless executive power when the office is held by
| their party. We've already seen evidence of that, Trump
| has succeeded using arguments that Biden failed with just
| a couple years ago. Right about the time 2028 rolls
| around, the Supreme Court will suddenly decide that
| they've gone too far and need to reel in an out-of-
| control executive branch.
| dylan604 wrote:
| Just wait for repeal of two-term limits approved by
| SCOTUS so there'll be no need to test the other party
| theory
| loeg wrote:
| This is an extremely optimistic view. I don't think the
| Dems can take the legislative branch (certainly not the
| Senate).
| loeg wrote:
| The Dems still seem relentlessly unserious about trying
| to win enough votes to govern, sadly.
| dylan604 wrote:
| I think the recent Tennessee election shows that even
| though things have soured, they haven't soured enough for
| sweeping changes in elections. Special elections are
| strange litmus tests to be basing anything on. Regardless
| of what polls may lead you to believe, there are still
| plenty of people that will not vote for the other party
| regardless of how "bad" their party's candidate is.
|
| To regain control of both houses with enough margins to
| ensure impeachment & conviction would be an incredible
| swing. I just don't see it happening.
|
| Texas just got its redrawn maps approved by SCOTUS. I'm
| still expecting SCOTUS to reject California's though when
| that case comes to them. The court will do its part in
| keeping the GOP in power.
| zikduruqe wrote:
| Don't forget the one or two cool circular chickenpox scars
| that you might still have today.
|
| It was like a badge of honor.
| giantg2 wrote:
| We vaccinate for many of those already. The vast majority of
| seniors have the shingles virus already. Only a small
| percentage would likely have dementia not linked to another
| likely cause. Just as HPV only causes cancer in some
| individuals.
|
| It wouldn't surprise me if it turns out all these tie back to
| immune dysregulation and are just triggered by different
| viruses in different people.
| CrossVR wrote:
| For Multiple Sclerosis multiple studies have shown it is
| strongly correlated with an EBV infection and only an EBV
| infection. After the infection it just becomes a genetic
| lottery with a really shitty prize.
| loeg wrote:
| > We should be vaccinating kids against all of them rather than
| sending them to Chickenpox parties.
|
| This has been the standard of care ever since the vaccine
| became available in the 90s (US). The origin of the "parties"
| was that first-time chickenpox was perceived to be less harmful
| in children than adults prior to the vaccine, so you wanted to
| make sure people's first exposure wasn't in adulthood.
| paleotrope wrote:
| Is getting chickenpox the first as an adult more dangerous
| than as a kid not true or unproven?
| mlyle wrote:
| It's true -- you'll have a worse time on average and a
| higher chance of severe side effects.
|
| If you had an overwhelming chance of getting chicken pox,
| getting it in early school age reasonably seemed to be the
| best option.
| CrossVR wrote:
| Unfortunately that is not the case for me in the Netherlands.
| No Chickenpox vaccination is offered and making sure kids get
| it early is still considered the right way to do
| immunization.
|
| The idea being that it's better for people to get it as kids,
| because if you give them vaccines as kids you'll have to give
| them boosters as adults. Whereas a latent disease will
| provide a lifetime of immunity.
| yread wrote:
| It's not offered but you can still get it. I had to
| literally ask my huisarts (GP) to google it after he said
| there is no such thing. Luckily, he did and local hospital
| pharmacy had it in stock.
| tzs wrote:
| > The idea being that it's better for people to get it as
| kids, because if you give them vaccines as kids you'll have
| to give them boosters as adults. Whereas a latent disease
| will provide a lifetime of immunity.
|
| Adults vaccinated against chickenpox do not need boosters
| as adults.
| cameronh90 wrote:
| I don't have any unique insight on it, but I think
| herpesviruses are probably worse than we realise.
|
| They hide from the immune system inside nerves or other immune
| cells, and seem to have a lot of weird associations with other
| issues over our lifetime, particularly neurological and immune
| problems.
| orochimaaru wrote:
| I grew up in India (70,80,90) before coming to the US in 2000.
| I'm not a vaccine sceptic. But this sort of thing makes me
| cringe.
|
| I've had chicken pox, mumps and measles growing up. Everyone I
| grew up with had those. No one is experiencing dementia or any
| sort of neurodegeneration. There was a chicken pox epidemic in
| my engineering university dorm. I didn't catch it since I had
| it earlier as a kid. Either way none of the people who had it
| are having issues.
|
| I think take the vax to prevent the disease. The
| neurodegenerative side effects are just advertisement for the
| vaccine.
| watwut wrote:
| > No one is experiencing dementia or any sort of
| neurodegeneration.
|
| Measles specifically cause lifelong disabilities, so yes,
| people do actually suffer those.
| InitialLastName wrote:
| If you were born in 1970, you (and presumably the people you
| grew up with) are ~55. The sample set in this particular
| study are 71-88 years old (plus 7 years after), so 16+ years
| older than you (years that also coincide with increased
| prevalence of noticeable dementia and neurodegeneration).
| hn_acc1 wrote:
| Consider yourself lucky. My mom had measles as a kid (1940s)
| and for several years had a high rate of ear infections, etc.
| BigTTYGothGF wrote:
| Are you seriously still in contact with everyone you grew up
| with? And everyone you went to undergraduate with?
| orochimaaru wrote:
| Yes - at least 25-30 people. Some more back in India but I
| hardly go back much these days.
|
| I mean chicken pox was pretty rampant. Everyone I knew got
| it - I mean everyone at some point before becoming an
| adult. It was just a rite of passage.
| baq wrote:
| 'I haven't witnessed second order effects therefore they
| don't exist' is a myopic position to take. The advertisement
| argument is so cynical and depressing I find it hard to even
| think about rebutting. It probably doesn't make sense to try,
| because it's an axiomatic world view, these are kinda hard to
| argue with.
| orochimaaru wrote:
| That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying for people my age
| and my parents and grandparents - they all had these
| diseases. I don't think you can even make a comparison for
| chicken pox - literally everyone used to get that one. Same
| for measles and mumps.
|
| Keep in mind I'm not saying don't take the vaccine. I'm
| just saying I don't believe that these second order effects
| are as prevalent as they're made out to be
| dragonwriter wrote:
| > I've had chicken pox, mumps and measles growing up.
| Everyone I grew up with had those. No one is experiencing
| dementia or any sort of neurodegeneration.
|
| Are you asserting dementia and neurodegeneration don't exist
| in India, or merely not in your set of close personal
| acquantances? Because if its the latter, that... hardly means
| anything. The expected prevalence even with a past history of
| diseases that increase the risk isn't high enough that it not
| happening that you are aware of in your personal circle is...
| really noteworthy at all, unless your circle is large and/or
| you have detailed access to the private medical information
| of everyone in it.
| quickthrowman wrote:
| I am part of the tail end of purposely exposing kids to chicken
| pox, I got them in 1989 and the vaccine was released a few
| years later. I wish the vaccine would've been available, I know
| multiple people that have experienced shingles in their _eyes_.
| Crossing my fingers until I make it to 50 and can get my
| shingles vaccine.
| cogman10 wrote:
| I was born in '85 and got chickenpox at 7. My parents aren't
| quiet antivaxxers but they also have a sort of "you don't
| need all vaccines" attitude (so no way I was getting the new
| chickenpox vaccine).
|
| I've recently had shingles and, let me tell you, it sucks
| ass. I thought my liver was going to explode.
|
| I'll be getting the shingles vaccine as soon as possible.
| gorfian_robot wrote:
| this is nice side benefit. but when you hit 50 you want the
| shingrex (two shots) vax ASAP. you def do NOT want shingles.
| gorfian_robot wrote:
| my dad (who has had the shingrex) sometimes still gets a mild
| case on his legs and when it does it is too painful to have
| anything touch his legs. no pants, not even a sheet.
|
| my mom (who passed before shingrex) got a bad case in one eye
| and went blind in that eye.
|
| so nice that kids have been getting the chickenpox vaccine for
| a while now and shouldn't have to deal much with shingles as
| the age.
| giancarlostoro wrote:
| I already got it, apparently there's a weird uptick in men to
| the point where some doctors are like, nah you don't have that,
| and then sure enough they realize you do upon further
| inspection. For context I know men who have gotten it in their
| mid to late 20s I got it in my early 30s. I'm not sure what the
| cause is, but for additional context, Shingles is way more
| common in women.
|
| So there might need to be more studies into shingles and why
| men are getting it more frequently and younger.
| modeless wrote:
| I've heard a theory that since the chickenpox vaccine for
| kids, natural exposure to the virus in the wild is way down,
| and our immune systems are more likely to forget about it.
| Not specific to men of course, but a possible explanation for
| an increase in shingles generally.
| square_usual wrote:
| There's been a few studies that found increase in shingles
| as the chicken pox vaccine became more widespread in the
| US, actually. With the usual caveat that correlation is not
| causation.
| Izikiel43 wrote:
| How was the study done?
|
| If the vaccine became available in the 90s, and it was
| given to kids mostly, those people are 40 at most now, so
| how is the increase in shingles measured? More cases when
| younger? More older people getting it?
|
| Thinking about it within this context doesn't make much
| sense.
| modeless wrote:
| The increase in shingles is in people who weren't
| vaccinated as kids. People who were vaccinated as kids
| and never got infected don't get shingles at all AFAIK.
| brendoelfrendo wrote:
| Hello! Another datapoint here, both I and a friend of mine
| got shingles in our early 30s. I had to go to two different
| doctors because the first just assumed that it was "bad acne"
| (my shingles followed the trigeminal nerve across my face).
| Second doctor immediately clocked it as shingles. It was
| perhaps the second most painful experience of my life, not so
| much because it was intensely painful but because the pain
| was constant and resistant to relief.
|
| I'm told that stress can cause shingles to flare up, in that
| stress also suppresses the immune system, and both my friend
| and I were going through one of the most stressful phases of
| our lives at the time, so I always chalked it up to that. Not
| a very strong hypothesis, though.
| detourdog wrote:
| I had shingles across my back in 7th grade. I remember at
| the time being told since I didn't have chickenpox as a kid
| that led to my shingles. I was also told that once you have
| shingles you are immune. I have since learned both are not
| true. I also will get pain in the same location that my
| shingles started when under great stress.
|
| I got the shingles vaccine last year.
| brandensilva wrote:
| I thought I was the youngest but I was 16. You win.
|
| How old are you now? Did th vaccine help your symptoms?
| brendoelfrendo wrote:
| I never had the chickenpox as a kid, either. The doc
| shrugged and noted that I obviously had the virus in my
| system, so I must have had a sub-clinical case. I recall
| that when we were young, my sister had a very mild case
| of chickenpox, so I assume that I got some exposure from
| her even though at the time assumed I managed to avoid
| it.
| o_m wrote:
| I got it last year, as a man in my early 30s. My doctor
| didn't believe me but his eyes widened as I showed him the
| rash. It took him one second to say that is shingles, with no
| doubt. If you get it you have to get to the doctor ASAP to
| get the antiviral medicine before it spreads. It is the most
| painful thing I have gone through.
|
| I'm pretty sure I got is because of stress. I quit my job,
| sold my home and all my stuff to travel for a year. I was
| awarded shingles the week after handing in my resignation.
| baq wrote:
| I've self medicated with OTC acyclovir before getting a
| stronger prescription and it worked quite well. The trick
| was to diagnose quickly, the tell was the itching wouldn't
| stop even while scratching.
|
| Pro tip: keep some cold sore oral medicine at hand.
| square_usual wrote:
| Add another datapoint here if you'd like, got it in my late
| 20s this year. Fortunately I caught it very early and didn't
| have as bad of a case as many here seem to have had. My
| doctor said it's not uncommon to have shingles as a young
| person, and when I researched it more I found studies that
| agree with some sibling comments re: lack of exposure to
| people with chicken pox making it more common.
| giancarlostoro wrote:
| For me it was a rash on my hands, and I thought it was my
| dogs leash. It was not until I got the uh blisters that my
| wife told me what I probably had, and it was too late by
| then unfortunately. The nerve pain is not worth it. I would
| have gotten the shot immediately had I known early enough.
| To make matters worse, I think I went to a family event,
| and the AC where we were staying had just died, so my
| itchiness was through the roof in South Florida. Nothing
| was as awful as the random nerve pain though, I cannot
| imagine being 50+ and getting the nerve pain.
| euroderf wrote:
| Another data point. I caught it in my 60s.
|
| I didn't know there's a vaccine. Nobody in healthcare here in
| Finland has mentioned it, so maybe it's not on offer.
| robin_reala wrote:
| Neighbouring country here, it's a private vaccination but
| the companies are pretty forwards about it being available.
| But you do unfortunately have to wait until you're 50.
| brandensilva wrote:
| Well sounds like I'm the youngest around here. I got it when
| I was 16/17. Honestly I kind of forgot about it for awhile
| but have weird nerve pain sometimes when I'm stressed now
| that I'm 41 so I assume it still lingers in me.
|
| Looking to find out more about the vaccine and it's impacts
| on existing shingle victims.
| giancarlostoro wrote:
| I know one of my wife's childhood friends she got it at
| like 17 too. What was really interesting is her parents
| never had chickenpox, and they never caught it from them or
| something like that? Her brother also never caught it.
| There's some weird immunity to it I suppose or maybe it
| doesn't affect everyone the same.
| tptacek wrote:
| Having had the pleasure of having it once already, in my 30s,
| it drives me nuts that I have to wait to vaccinate against it.
| Maybe the sickest I've ever been.
| swatcoder wrote:
| If it offers consolation, I share your story and just
| developed it a second time recently (about 7 years after the
| first, brought on by overtraining again).
|
| Being familiar with the prodrome and early symptoms, I was
| able to get treatment _way_ sooner than I did the first time.
| Between that and perhaps having a more primed immune system,
| this second encounter was far shorter and less intense.
|
| Still not fun, and I'm hoping it'll earn me early access to
| the vaccine, but I'm more optimistic about it being muted if
| that doesn't happen and it comes back a third time.
| codyb wrote:
| This was definitely a huge factor for me. Since it was on
| the skin I waited for a dermatologist when I should have
| gone to any doctor immediately, I'm sure it would have been
| fairly clear since I eventually was able to suss out that
| it was shingles on my own before I got to the
| dermatologist.
|
| Shingles sucked lol, definitely not a great time.
| loeg wrote:
| Get your GP to prescribe it! You can get it under 50, just
| need a prescription.
|
| (I had shingles in my 20s; it sucks; I got shingrix in my 30s
| by Rx.)
| pstuart wrote:
| Absolutely true. And note that there apparently are antivirals
| available to help mitigate it and should be obtained promptly
| upon the outbreak.
|
| I didn't know this and now after having shingles I have
| postherpetic neuralgia and am cursed with chronic pain for the
| rest of my life. It's not bad enough to check out, but it
| certainly isn't fun.
| toomuchtodo wrote:
| Can you say you're immunocompromised to get it younger?
| loeg wrote:
| You can get your GP to prescribe it. The 50 cutoff is just
| the age you can get it without a prescription.
| m3kw9 wrote:
| i thought the vaccine in the study isn't shingrex.
| tim333 wrote:
| Agree shingles isn't nice. I had it a couple of years ago aged
| 59. It can be brought on by covid weakening the immune system.
| loeg wrote:
| Get it before 50. Ask your GP to prescribe; they can and will.
| The 50 cutoff is stupid.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| > shingrex (two shots)
|
| Huh. Well that's good to know. I got the shot in April, but
| unless I am already getting very forgetful, my doctor did not
| mention a second shot. And I haven't gotten any calls from them
| about it (they are normally proactive about the routine things,
| so this is a little bit of a surprise).
|
| So if it's always a two-shot regimen, I need the second one
| ASAP. It's almost 8 months now since I got the first one.
| Thanks to you I just sent my doc a note to find out.
| jghn wrote:
| My PCP told me to hold off until late 50s on the argument that
| there's no indication for boosters, and if I were to live a
| long, full life that the protection would be waning as I enter
| my more vulnerable years.
|
| I understand the argument and it makes sense on paper, but this
| doesn't seem to be a general sentiment.
| EvanAnderson wrote:
| My PCP made the same argument (which I wrote much less
| clearly than you did in another comment). My sister-in-law
| had it last year (at 43) and she was miserable. Rolling the
| dice on this scares the willies out of me.
| bink wrote:
| I looked this up recently because I was vaccinated for it a
| couple years ago. What I found was that you're recommended to
| get a booster after 7 years (my doctor said around 10 years
| when I got the shot).
| Qem wrote:
| This is counter-intuitive for me. Immune system senescence is
| a thing. Naively I would assume it should be better to get it
| early, as a younger immune system has better odds to react
| strongly to the antigen, providing long lasting protection.
| Often the elderly organism doesn't react, or the reaction is
| too weak, to vaccine stimulation. E.g. see https://www.scienc
| edirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S01652...
| ZebusJesus wrote:
| This is fascinating
| ZebusJesus wrote:
| how do you get downvoted for thinking science is cool, serious
| ln809 wrote:
| Article specifically refers to vaccination with live attenuated
| virus... Should a difference be inferred between Shingrix and
| Zostavax (in the context of the effect on dementia, not shingles)
|
| Background to the question is providers here seem to be switching
| to Shingrix for (claimed) higher effectiveness against shingles,
| but there's at least some suggestion that Shingix is not live
| (attenuated) virus...
| kieranmaine wrote:
| From https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2025-06-25-how-do-vaccines-
| reduce-...
|
| > The shingles vaccine now in widespread use (Shingrix) has
| more of an effect than the previous one (Zostavax). A key
| difference between these vaccines is that Shingrix contains an
| 'adjuvant', an ingredient designed to enhance the vaccine's
| effect. It is therefore possible that the adjuvant contributes
| to Shingrix' greater effect than Zostavax on reducing dementia.
| jmward01 wrote:
| Get vaccinated. Stay healthy. Science works.
| mzs wrote:
| from one of the previous papers:
|
| "To provide causal as opposed to correlational evidence, we take
| advantage of the fact that, in Wales, eligibility for the zoster
| vaccine was determined on the basis of an individual's exact date
| of birth. Those born before 2 September 1933 were ineligible and
| remained ineligible for life, whereas those born on or after 2
| September 1933 were eligible for at least 1 year to receive the
| vaccine."
|
| Eyting, M., Xie, M., Michalik, F. et al. A natural experiment on
| the effect of herpes zoster vaccination on dementia. Nature 641,
| 438-446 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-025-08800-x
| hn_acc1 wrote:
| Definitely got shingrix once I hit 50. The first one hit me
| pretty hard..
|
| Did a blood antibody test, for some reason, no rubella anti-
| bodies. Will get that + dTap (9 years old, need tetanus booster
| soon anyway) before they outlaw them..
| latchkey wrote:
| Same... and the second one hit me just as hard. Glad I did it
| though.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-12-05 23:02 UTC)