Swiss Slavicist Felix Philipp Ingold followed with ""Zerbrechende Mythen"" ("Crumbling myths") in 1996, in support of the idea that Losev was antisemitic. Professor Alexander Haardt of Ruhr University Bochum responded to Ingold by defending Losev's reputation. Haardt said that Losev's legacy should not be smeared by a few words but judged by the whole of his life's work. He said the antisemitic statements listed in Gerasimova's politically motivated investigation from 1930 to 1931 could not be trusted as originating from Losev. Losev's defenders characterized him as a principled critic of all religions including Protestantism, Judaism, and his own orthodoxy, and said that he was never anti-Jew. He was also said to be in approval of Communist totalitarianism even while he freely criticized the emptiness of Communist ideology. Russian philosopher Leonid Stolovich wrote very strongly against those who called Losev an antisemite, the article titled "Losev should not be handed over as a gift to the Black Hundred followers!" He said that mitigating documents that should have been included in the OGPU investigation case files appeared to be missing, likely because they did not support the antisemitic conclusions. In 1999, Katsis re-examined the issue in light of the letters and files published in late 1996. He found the issue to be more nuanced than he previously thought, and agreed that "all attempts to distort" Losev's legacy were "politically motivated".