tr.euronews.com
Shingles Vaccine May Reduce Heart Attack and Stroke Risk, Study Suggests
A new analysis of 19 studies revealed that adults who received the herpes zoster vaccine, commonly known as the shingles vaccine, had an 18% lower risk of serious cardiovascular events; among those 50 and older, the risk reduction was 16%.
- What is the methodology behind this study and what are its limitations?
- The study analyzed data from 19 existing studies. A key limitation is that the data is observational; therefore, it cannot definitively prove that the vaccine directly reduces heart attack and stroke risk. More research is needed to establish a direct causal link between the vaccine and the reduced risk.
- What are the potential broader implications of this research and what further steps are needed?
- This research suggests a potential additional benefit of the shingles vaccine beyond preventing shingles infection. Further studies are needed to confirm a direct causal relationship and determine if this effect is consistent across different vaccine types and populations. The results were presented at the European Society of Cardiology Congress 2025, but not yet published in a peer-reviewed journal.
- What is the key finding of this new analysis regarding the shingles vaccine and cardiovascular health?
- The analysis of data from 19 studies showed that adults who received the shingles vaccine had an 18% lower risk of serious cardiovascular events, including heart attacks and strokes, compared to those who did not. For those 50 and older, the risk reduction was 16%. This finding, however, is based on observational studies and does not definitively prove a direct causal link.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article presents a new study suggesting a link between the shingles vaccine and reduced risk of heart attack and stroke. While it highlights the positive findings, it also includes caveats from the researchers acknowledging limitations in the study design (observational data) and the need for further research. The inclusion of both positive results and critical considerations demonstrates a balanced approach, although the prominent placement of the positive finding may still subtly frame the information more favorably towards the vaccine.
Language Bias
The language used is mostly neutral and objective, reporting the study's findings without excessive emotional language. However, describing the findings as "encouraging" from a researcher employed by the vaccine's manufacturer could be considered slightly loaded. The description of shingles itself focuses on the negative aspects ("painful rash", "weeks to clear").
Bias by Omission
The study's funding by GSK, a pharmaceutical company that produces the shingles vaccine, is disclosed, but the potential influence of this funding on the results or interpretations is not extensively analyzed. The article also omits discussion of any potential side effects of the shingles vaccine that might outweigh the benefits suggested by the study. Further, details about the specific methodologies of the 19 studies analyzed are absent, preventing a full evaluation of their quality and robustness.
Sustainable Development Goals
The study directly relates to SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being) by showing that the shingles vaccine can reduce the risk of heart attack and stroke. This contributes to improved cardiovascular health and a reduction in the burden of non-communicable diseases, which is a key target under SDG 3. The findings suggest a potential public health benefit through vaccination, aligning with the SDG's goals of ensuring healthy lives and promoting well-being for all at all ages.