It seems that everything these days is groundbreaking and innovative. Some of it may be, but the last majority of research moves knowledge forward incrementally. Because new knowledge and understanding happens slowly and unevenly, the projected path of actual clinical application is also bumpy and somewhat unpredictable. So, even though editors and the public may demand simple solutions, the journalist should resist giving them unless there is very clear evidence to the contrary. What it will do is lower your risk for cardiovascular complications, causing you to stay healthy longer and thereby increasing your chances of longer life.
Risk is tricky to understand and interpret.
There are certain things with which you should be familiar, if you're going to do any health-care reporting at all. You should be familiar with the scientific approach by which a problem is defined, a hypothesis or question is raised, deductive reasoning is applied, the hypothesis is tested through collection and analysis of data, and finally, the hypothesis is confirmed or rejected. You should understand the clinical trial process, the scientific way in which agents or procedures are tested to ensure safety and effectiveness. Methods are compared, often using a placebo or sham treatment that makes objective measurements possible. There is also a phase process where, for example, pharmaceuticals move from the laboratory, into animals, then into selected individuals, and finally into widespread use.