Sheila L. Ealey's Reply to the Washington Post

Sheila L. Ealey's Reply to the Washington Post

On June 19, 2019, Lena H. Sun and Amy Brittain, of the Washington Post published a hit piece entitled “Meet the New York couple donating millions to the anti-vax movement“. Among other things, the article attacked well known health rights activist Sheila L. Ealey, unnamed in the article. Below is Sheila’s response to Martin Baron, the editor of the publication. The paper has not responded and has not corrected any of their misinformation.

Dear Mr. Baron,

On June 19th, your article titled “Meet the New York couple donating millions to the anti-vax movement” references me and the plight of my autistic son without naming us. I was not asked for an interview or to comment on this story. Specifically, the quote “The stories in the film frequently fall apart when scrutinized,” was a direct challenge to our account of vaccine injury in the movie VAXXED. I am appalled at the complete lack of journalistic integrity of four so-called journalists who wrote or contributed to Washington Post’s hit piece on families adversely affected by vaccinations and on me. Here’s what else they wrote about me:

“For example, one mother featured in the film said her son developed autism after he was inadvertently given a double dose of the MMR vaccine. Filmmakers provided no medical documentation to support the claim, and the mother has said publicly that her son’s medical records were stolen from her apartment.”

Your writers left out the very key fact that my son is a twin, and both children were brought to the doctor together that day. Their shots were laid out on a tray. So it’s easy to see how my son received two of the same shots by mistake. Leaving out this fact makes the double inoculation seem far-fetched. The actual truth that he is a twin and twins at that age are usually brought to the doctor together was utterly left out to discredit my narrative.

Your writers also conveniently left out the fact that I went on to describe my son’s IMMEDIATE reaction to the vaccines when I brought him home and his total change physically within 24 hours. Why does my description of his head-banging – a known autistic behavior – within hours of receiving a vaccine not merit a mention in your article if you are genuinely an unbiased, neutral news source? The fact that my son’s medical records no longer exist is irrelevant since there are thousands of parents who can provide you with medical documentation that their children’s autistic symptoms began after vaccines. And your newspaper would no doubt continue to refer to every single one of them as “parents who claim vaccines caused their child’s autism.”

As an African American parent, I was particularly incensed that in your entire 2,264-word article, not even one word was mentioned about the central figure in the film VAXXED, William Thompson, Ph.D., lead scientist in the CDC’s MMR study. The study initially showed a link between the MMR vaccine and autism in African American children, and then that link was fraudulently suppressed by the very scientists conducting the research, according to Dr.Thompson himself. His actual recorded words describing the fraud are featured in the film, and NO ONE has disputed that the voice in the movie is his. Dr.Thompson still works at the CDC with whistleblower status.

The fact that Dr. Thompson’s role in the film VAXXED was very clearly and intentionally left out of an article that was focused on the film is proof of the Washington Post’s complicity in the callous cover-up of vaccine harm and death of genetically-susceptible children. There’s a word for that. Genocide.

The writers’ exclusion of the fundamental fact that vaccines are the only product whose manufacturers are 100% shielded from lawsuits if a vaccine causes injury or death is further proof of their extreme bias. Do you know the price of a dead child in HHS’ vaccine court? The court awarded parents of Peyton Leigh Krause Blocker just $137,500 after 8 vaccines killed her in 12 hours. Leaving so many truths out of your reporting on vaccinations simply makes your newspaper an arm of pharma.

Once a great newspaper, the Washington Post is nothing more than a propaganda tool of the wealthiest industry in the world.

I’d like to close by thanking you for at least providing me with a much-needed laugh: the article attempted to shock the reader with news of $3 million in donations to a group that disseminates the unvarnished truth about vaccines. How many millions has the Washington Post received from pharmaceutical advertising? Would your four writers be willing to dig out and publish that information? And how many billions does pharma spend purveying pro-vaccine information? They spend $30 billion per year, promoting their products directly to doctors. One can only imagine the billions spent on advertising directly to consumers in industry propaganda mills such as yours.

Sheila L. Ealey