The Original Shingles Vaccine (Zostavax) and Dementia Risk: What the Evidence Suggests—and What It Doesn’t

 A Bio Precision Aging Evidence-Based Brief

Read time - 3 Minutes

The original shingles vaccine—Zostavax—was a live-attenuated vaccine designed to reduce the risk of shingles (herpes zoster) and its most feared complication, long-lasting nerve pain called postherpetic neuralgia. In the U.S., Zostavax has largely been replaced by the newer recombinant vaccine Shingrix, which is more effective for shingles prevention.  What’s changed recently is that shingles vaccination is now being discussed for a second reason: multiple large human studies suggest it may be associated with a lower risk of developing dementia.

This is a big claim, so it deserves precision. The strongest work to date is not a small observational report—it’s a “natural experiment” that leverages real-world vaccination policy to approximate causality. In a large Welsh population, vaccine eligibility was determined by date-of-birth cutoffs, creating two highly comparable groups around the eligibility threshold. In that setting, researchers found that receiving the shingles vaccine was associated with about a 20% relative reduction in new dementia diagnoses over roughly seven years, and the protective signal appeared stronger in women.  This matters because it reduces a common criticism of vaccine studies: that vaccinated people are simply healthier or more proactive (“healthy vaccinee bias”). The study design was built to limit that bias.

That Welsh finding did not appear in a vacuum. Earlier work using UK Biobank data also found that people who had received Zostavax had a statistically significant reduction in dementia risk compared with those who hadn’t.  More recently, other datasets and analyses have continued to support an association between shingles vaccination and dementia outcomes, and some reports have explored whether vaccination might even be linked to slower progression among those already diagnosed, although that area is earlier and less settled. 

It’s also important to separate the “original vaccine” question from the “class effect” question. Zostavax is the older, live-attenuated vaccine; Shingrix is a recombinant vaccine with an adjuvant (AS01) that drives a strong immune response. Observational research has suggested Shingrix may be associated with a lower dementia risk as well, and some studies hypothesize the adjuvant-driven immune training could be part of the benefit.  However, even with increasingly sophisticated designs, these are still not the same as randomized clinical trials specifically built to test dementia prevention, and health authorities emphasize that more research is needed to establish causality and mechanisms. 

So what could explain a dementia signal from a shingles vaccine? There are three leading hypotheses, each plausible and not mutually exclusive. First, preventing shingles may reduce episodes of varicella-zoster virus reactivation, which can trigger inflammation and vascular stress that may affect the brain over time. Second, vaccination may create broader immune effects—sometimes described as “trained immunity”—that improves the body’s ability to control inflammatory cascades relevant to neurodegeneration. Third, in the case of Shingrix, the immune-stimulating adjuvant may produce more durable immune remodeling than older platforms. The honest answer is that we do not yet know which mechanism dominates, and it may differ by sex, baseline immune state, and age. 

Now to the “anti-aging benefits” question—because dementia risk is only one dimension of health span. The most concrete, highest-confidence benefits of shingles vaccination are not theoretical. They include fewer shingles cases, reduced postherpetic neuralgia, fewer missed workdays, less sleep disruption, and less chronic pain—outcomes that matter for cognitive performance, training consistency, mood, and resilience in the real world. The newer vaccine (Shingrix) replaced Zostavax in many countries because it provides stronger protection against shingles, especially as people age.  When you zoom out and look at aging as “how many years you keep full function,” preventing a debilitating pain syndrome and prolonged inflammatory illness is a legitimate health span win—even if it never shows up as a biomarker headline.

There is also emerging discussion about broader downstream benefits—such as cardiovascular outcomes or reduced vascular dementia signals—in observational analyses of vaccinated populations. These signals are intriguing but should be treated as hypothesis-generating rather than settled truth, because they are more vulnerable to confounding and selective follow-up than the best natural experiment work.  The responsible stance is to view these as potential upside, not as a reason to vaccinate on their own.

If you’re thinking about this like an executive, the practical conclusion is simple. The shingles vaccine is already a mainstream preventive intervention for older adults, with strong evidence for preventing shingles and its complications. The dementia findings—especially the Welsh natural experiment—raise the possibility that shingles vaccination could become one of the first widely available, low-friction interventions associated with a meaningful reduction in dementia risk.  But it has not yet earned the status of a proven dementia-prevention therapy, and anyone claiming certainty is ahead of the evidence. 

The bottom line is that the “original shingles vaccine” story is no longer just about preventing a rash. It may be pointing toward a deeper relationship between immune activation, viral reactivation, inflammation, and brain aging. The signal is strong enough to take seriously, strong enough to justify clinical trials, and strong enough to be part of a sophisticated longevity conversation—but still not strong enough to market as guaranteed cognitive protection.

Citations:

1) Welsh “natural experiment” using date-of-birth eligibility cutoff: Regression-discontinuity population study designed to limit healthy-vaccinee bias.

Geldsetzer P, Zhu L, Hurley C, et al. Association between herpes zoster vaccination and incident dementia in a natural experiment in Wales. Nature Communications. 2023;14:5969. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37804847/

What it showed:

• ~20% relative reduction in dementia diagnoses

• ~7 years follow-up

• Stronger effect in women

• Policy eligibility threshold → quasi-randomized groups

2) Earlier UK Biobank observational association (Zostavax exposure)

Population cohort analysis showing lower dementia incidence among vaccinated individuals.

Scherrer JF, Salas J, Wiemken TL, et al. Impact of herpes zoster vaccination on incident dementia: A UK Biobank cohort study. Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease. 2021;79(3):1227-1237. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33361794/

3) Additional datasets supporting association (replication across populations): Multiple real-world cohorts including US Veterans and insurance databases.

• Scherrer JF, Salas J, et al. Herpes zoster vaccination and risk of dementia in older adults. Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease. 2021;81(3):1207-1217.https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33907185/

• Chen Y-H, et al. Herpes zoster vaccination reduces risk of dementia in older adults: population-based cohort study. BMC Medicine. 2022;20:247.https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35760386/

• 4) Possible effect on progression after diagnosis

4) Representative example:

Klinger D, Hill BL, Barda N, et al. Vaccination and Alzheimer’s disease progression: observational analysis of electronic health records. NPJ Vaccines. 2022.https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35301452/

Educational Disclaimer: This content is for educational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Vaccination decisions should be made with a qualified healthcare professional based on age, health conditions, and local clinical guidelines.