LifeSiteNews says a retracted paper claimed COVID shots gave protective antibodies. The paper tested an experimental vaccine in mice
Science Translational Medicine did retract a 2022 Francis Crick Institute paper on 14 October over fabricated data. But the paper studied an experimental vaccine targeting the S2 part of the spike protein, tested in mice, not the COVID-19 vaccines given to the public. The article’s VAERS figures are reports, which the system itself says cannot show that a vaccine caused an event.
By TradWatch™ staff
2 min read
Share this piece
Verdicts at a glance
- Misleading
A retracted paper had claimed that the COVID-19 vaccines produced protective antibodies. · LifeSiteNews
In this brief · 7 sections
On 20 October 2026 LifeSiteNews reported that Science Translational Medicine had retracted a 2022 paper led by a Francis Crick Institute researcher after an investigation found fabricated data and falsified images.
What was said
Statement 1: LifeSiteNews
LifeSiteNews · October 20, 2026
A peer-reviewed medical journal has announced the retraction of a paper that purported to show that the COVID-19 shots produced antibodies protective against future infection
In brief: A retracted paper had claimed that the COVID-19 vaccines produced protective antibodies.
Our verdict: MisleadingContains some truth but leaves a false impression.
See the recordThis content is embedded for purposes of commentary, criticism, and news reporting. TradWatch is not affiliated with LifeSiteNews. Views quoted are those of the speaker.
Context
The article also cites The Epoch Times on other papers by the same lead author; those are not rated here.
The record
What the sources show, statement by statement.
Verifiable factcan be checked against the sources cited.TradWatch analysisis our interpretation, clearly labelled.Statement 1 · LifeSiteNews
A retracted paper had claimed that the COVID-19 vaccines produced protective antibodies.
Verifiable fact What the paper studied
The paper, “SARS-CoV-2 S2-targeted vaccination elicits broadly neutralizing antibodies” (2022), reported that “vaccination with SARS-CoV-2 S2 elicited antibodies in mice” that neutralized several coronaviruses in the laboratory. It tested an experimental vaccine aimed at the S2 subunit of the spike protein, not the authorized COVID-19 vaccines (Ng et al., 2022).
Source
- 2
Scientific
Ng KW et al., 14(655):eabn3715 (retracted)
SARS-CoV-2 S2-targeted vaccination elicits broadly neutralizing antibodies
Science Translational Medicine · July 27, 2022
- 2
Verifiable fact The retraction is real
The journal published the retraction on 14 October 2026 (retraction notice). LifeSiteNews’s account of the reasons, fabricated data and falsified images found by a Crick Institute investigation, is consistent with that notice as it reports it.
Source
- 3
Scientific
Retraction of the Research Article “SARS-CoV-2 S2-targeted vaccination elicits broadly neutralizing antibodies”
Science Translational Medicine · October 14, 2026
- 3
Verifiable fact What VAERS figures show
The article goes on to cite deaths and other events reported to VAERS. The system’s own data page says that “VAERS reports alone cannot be used to determine if a vaccine caused or contributed to an adverse event or illness” (VAERS).
Source
Bottom line
Misleading: the paper was retracted, but it tested an experimental S2 vaccine in mice, not the COVID-19 shots given to the public. VAERS reports cannot show that a vaccine caused an event.
The original
Sources
- 1.Primary sourceCited in statement 1
Medical journal retracts COVID shot paper over ‘fabricated data’
LifeSiteNews · October 20, 2026
lifesitenews.com/news/medical-journal-retracts-covid-shot-paper-over-fabricated…
- 2.ScientificCited in statement 1
Ng KW et al., 14(655):eabn3715 (retracted) — SARS-CoV-2 S2-targeted vaccination elicits broadly neutralizing antibodies
Science Translational Medicine · July 27, 2022
- 3.ScientificCited in statement 1
Science Translational Medicine · October 14, 2026
- 4.Primary sourceCited in statement 1
Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (CDC/FDA)
Corrections & updates
No corrections have been made to this brief. Spotted an error? Request a correction.
We invite the people and outlets discussed here to respond. Submit a response and we’ll publish it alongside this brief.
Help us keep the record straight
If we’ve made a mistake, tell us — we correct errors openly and log every change. People and outlets we write about can respond, and we publish their replies here.
Share this analysis
More analysis
- Freemasonry and conspiracy claimsLifeSiteNews says Catholics who join a Masonic lodge are automatically excommunicated. Membership is forbidden and gravely sinful, but the current law sets no automatic excommunicationAnswering an Austrian grand master, LifeSiteNews says the Church punishes any Catholic who joins a lodge with latae sententiae excommunication. That was the rule under the 1917 Code. Since 1983, the Church teaches that Masonic membership remains forbidden and that members are in a state of grave sin and may not receive Communion, while the Code sets a “just penalty” for joining such associations. · 2 min read
- LifeSiteNewsLifeSiteNews says Africa now has more Catholics than Europe. The Vatican’s mission agency figures say so, though one gloss in the article is wrongLifeSiteNews reports the Fides News Agency’s annual Church statistics: 288,312,000 Catholics in Africa against 287,240,000 in Europe, as of 2024. Its figures match Fides. It mislabels one line, calling 48,511 “non-religious” priests “diocesan”; Fides counts 279,238 diocesan priests. · 2 min read
- LifeSiteNewsBishop Schneider says the Ordinary Magisterium taught the titles “Coredemptrix” and “Mediatrix of All Graces”. Popes used them; the Vatican now calls the first always inappropriateIn a foreword quoted by LifeSiteNews, Bishop Athanasius Schneider argues that the Church’s Ordinary Magisterium taught these Marian titles over centuries. The Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith’s 2025 note records that popes used “Co-redemptrix”, John Paul II at least seven times, but says the doctrine was judged “not mature” in 1996 and that the title is “always inappropriate”. LifeSiteNews also softens the note’s wording. · 2 min read