[tempfortwitt90]

Does it lower it compared to not getting the virus nor the vaccine?

Seat belts lower car accident deaths. But not lower than simply not driving. Isn't this a similar example?

[anonymouskimmer]

Never getting the virus is always better. The chickenpox vaccine helps prevent chronic viral infection.

Assuming you're asking about whether shingles vaccination is comparable to re-exposure.

For the youth a vaccine should absolutely reduce the risk better than having a chronic infection to actively fight against when it flares up.

For non-chickenpox-vaccinated adults, I have no clue. I would expect shingles vaccination would be comparable as it effectively does the same thing. But there might be an added response from other parts of the adaptive immune response against a viral invader.

Regardless, with respect to the chickenpox vaccine, I think it's better to take a risk on the current middle-aged folks and elderly in favor of basically eliminating all of the risk for the young and future generations. Since this risk increase would be primarily for middle-aged folks and elderly who have children and grandchildren (as childless adults are already at increased risk from fewer re-exposure routes), I think it makes moral sense that they preference the health of their descendants over themselves.

[idiotsecant]

Yes, not getting viruses at all is preferable to getting vaccines. If you figure out how to make that one work let me know.

[labster]

Make 90%+ of your neighbors get vaccinated, then bask in your glorious herd immunity.