I don't think that would do me any good, because according to this girl posting replies to me and giving her stories not even doctors can be correct:
http://www.medhelp.org/posts/Lyme-Disease/Is-this-tick-bite-or-lyme-disease-bite-and-when-did-it-occur/show/2202387
She says this :
You say: "Again my chances are 10% if no bulls eye rash occurs." Balderdash.
"And then my chance is even lower if that tick wasn't attached to that spot for more than 36 hours." More balderdash.
"Despite you saying there is no scientific evidence. But that is what they say at the CDC." And the CDC is wrong. "
Again, they can't just pull this information out of their butt. She seems to be a lyme disease expert. They have to have some evidence to back up information they said. She is simply saying they are wrong with no evidence to back up her claim.
If CDC is wrong and doctors are wrong. Then who can I trust? I have to further inquire her and ask her why would they say if no bulls eye rash occurs and why if the tick is attached for more than 36 hours why is it more riskier. She is simply saying doctors and scientist could make this information so people don't panic. And that she is comparing that to doctors lying about aids.
She is really saying I should get treatment right away and take no chances.
My dad says it's not a tick bite, and that he wouldn't worry about every little strange markings on my body. And that you really have to be in the woods to get it. But my dad's obviously not a doctor or anything. Is all of this just an over reaction? I mean even if I go to the doctor, what's he going to say, he can't prove 100% scientifically without a doubt that I didn't get lyme disease.
She said this also:
"I remember clearly one of the head docs at the CDC (Centers for Disease Control) going on live TV in his long white doctor coat to stand in front of the news cameras to intone solemnly that if you were not gay, you could not get AIDS. He just flat said it, in an effort to quell the growing panic in the nation and elsewhere that AIDS could be transmitted as easily as the common cold. And at that point in the arrival of AIDS as a new disease, there was great confusion among the docs ... similar to the confusion now about Lyme.
In contrast with AIDS, the good news about Lyme is that it isn't as deadly as AIDS, tho it can make you quite ill. Been there, done that. "
Honestly, Lyme is not deadly, I'm not going to even bother with it. I don't even know what to think at this point. She is saying doctors simply don't know enough about Lyme so it's pointless, I guess.
I don't even know what to think at this point.