Dear Editor,

I enjoyed your article a couple of weeks back. I have told myself repeatedly I probably need to let go of this. Something-for good or ill - just won’t let me.

I was an engineering scientist in the space program for 20 years and successfully contributed to breeding a strain of varroa resistant honeybees (verified by FDA) for about 20.

I began investigating hydroxychloroquine in early April. After I had heard mention of it I began researching it using Google Translate to translate a study by the famed virologist Didier Raoult.

To make a long story shorter, when Dr. Raoult used a hydroxychloroquine/azithromycin cocktail in covid patients in the early stages of the disease he saw the virus loads drop like a rock. This was impressive to me. Later he tried his protocol on a larger group of patients - about 1,000.  His death rate was less than 1%. This was about 1/5th of the death rate (those testing positive) in America early on (I think its close to 3.5% now). 

Later he produced another study of 3,700 people that showed a death rate of only .9%. What really clicked it in for me was  the mean age of 45 with a standard deviation of 17. What this means essentially is that he had to have a significant number of “older people” in his group.

This wasn’t “proof” but if he was an honest researcher I thought, ”There  appears to be something powerful going on here. Why don’t  they send a team of specialists and confirm or deny the validity of his studies?”

All I saw were attacks on his studies. This blew my mind. I care about people, I thought any caring person would want  to give it a really good lookover.

About that time (unbeknown to me) there was an American doctor, Dr. Steve Crawford, being familiar with hydroxy from his time in Africa, who started himself on hydroxychloroquine before the president mentioned it. He then (after overcoming resistance from a pharmacy) treated 52 of 64 patients that tested positive.

His results of the 52 high risk patients that he obtained permission to use the hydroxy/azith cocktail was that he lost ZERO patients. Let that sink in. Of the 12 that refused, he lost “virtually 100%.” As a thinking human being I couldn’t simply wave that off.

There is so much to write here I cannot put it all in. I will simply say that I have never seen such a promising treatment given such negative treatment from the press — even to the point of censorship.

Dr. Vladimir Zelenko published in preprint a study showing less than .85% death rate in high risk patients.

When the Henry Ford Hospital study came out with a study  that showed a 50% reduction in death in those taking hydroxy, Dr. Fauci claimed that it was a “flawed study.” His only specific reason was “because many of the people given hydroxychloroquine were also given steroids, and steroids are known to help.”

My first thought was, “Why aren’t you getting excited about finding out why there was a 50% reduction in death instead of attacking hydroxy?” My next thought was, “You know, in a study that size I bet you could separate out the two variables - hydroxy and steroids - and find if they had effects independent of each other.”

Well, in a later defense of the study, they did exactly that.

Did Dr. Fauci ever acknowledge that? I have never read he did. Why did he discredit the study and then when his objections were answered not make a correction? Isn’t that the way science is supposed to work?

I will simply say I have witnessed that approach used dozens of times from a number of quarters.

I will close with the following comments. In my perplexity, about a month ago I reached out to the brilliant epidemiologist, Dr. Harvey Risch, of Yale, whose paper I had just read. He also personally communicated similar concerns.

Let me give you a couple of summary statements of his taken from his study and an article he wrote from the Washington Times 8/12/20: 

“To date, there are no studies whatsoever, published or in pre-print, that provide scientific evidence against the treatment approach for high-risk outpatients that I have described. None. Assertions to the contrary, whether by Fauci, the FDA, or anyone else, are without foundation. They constitute misleading and toxic disinformation.”

Also, from his study, he asserts that the increased risk of death due to this treatment regimen is less  than 1 in 10,000. It would be even less I would think for hydroxy used alone, which has been prescribed safely and without fanfare (before now) hundreds of millions of times.

 I admit I may be wrong but I have yet to be convinced that the hydroxychloroquine/azithromycin/zinc cocktail ­— if given upon immediate clinical suspicion of covid in high risk patients —will not reduce the overall death rate from covid by at least 50%, probably 80% or more. My honest opinion is that we are now needlessly losing 10’s of thousands of people. Whether that statement is true or not, it is wrong to shut down the debate by censorship or intimidation. I am not selling snake oil. I am simply trying to use my God given reasoning facilities to discern the truth.

I hope people will honestly and thoroughly investigate this for themselves and I appreciate having the possibility of a forum here to express my opinion.

John Horton

(1) comment


Thank you for taking the time to do this research and sharing your findings with us. Very interesting!

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.