Leslie Starr said: 

> altomomatic@  writes:
>> So if a tick bites, 
>> maybe the best thing to do is assume the worst and get treated, even if 
>> there are no symptoms.  (My tests haven't come back.)

> Also, it can take a couple of months before your body has built up 
> enough antibodies to cause a positive test result. I had mild flu 
> symptoms ten days after a tick bite, but no rash and negative test 
> results, so the doctor refused to give me antibiotics. I was sicker at 
> eight weeks, but still testing negative. Finally tested positive and 
> began treatment at ten weeks, by which time the disease was so 
> well established that it took years to recover.

I'm really sorry to hear about your ordeal. Lyme Disease is a very serious condition, and that doctor should have immediately prescribed antibiotics. The medical literature clearly states that symptoms are not always obvious, and Lyme disease tests are not always reliable. Given the severity of the disease, the doctor should have known that  it's *always* better to err on the side of caution.  

If anyone ever encounters a situation where a doctor refuses antibiotics for a tick bite, find a new smarter doctor or nurse practitioner ASAP.  This is one gamble you don't want to take! 


--
Shireen Gonzaga/Baltimore, MD