It's been awhile since I've done a public service announcement (
about five months, actually), and while I'd much rather serve as a good example than a dumb warning, I keep getting dealt cards in the Stupid suite, so I guess I'd better just play what I've got. The eternally-springing, if utterly ridiculous, hope that my 20/20 hindsight will help someone else in the future makes me feel warm and fuzzy even in the cold, harsh light of stupidity (it's a sort of red light, but it's not warm ... oh shut up, it's my metaphor and I will twist it however I like).
Anyway,
regular imaginary
readers insomniacs may recall that I had a "suspicious rash" a few weeks back, which sent me
scurrying to the doctor for medical advice and also saw me scheduled for an echocardiogram. Yeah, well, welcome to wyo's world—it's an "interesting" place to visit, but you wouldn't want to live here. Unless you're "interesting," too, and I totally mean that in the
air quotes-enclosed sense of the word.
So despite being symptomatic enough to be offered
Borrelia burgdorferi-killing antibiotics on the spot, I remained enough of a skeptic—ME! Skeptical! I know! It's absotively unbelievable, and yet, it's TRUE!—to defer treatment, unless such point did arrive at which I developed Lyme-indicative symptoms
other than a rash. And here, RIGHT HERE, my dears, is where the Public Service Announcement portion of this typically digressing blathergram comes into play, so sit up straight, eat your vegetables, and pay attention. Ready? Good. I'm only going to say this once (or twice or fifty times, maybe, depending on my redundancy threshold later in the post), but I'm going to say it LOUDLY:
If your doctor suggests that you take antibiotics for Lyme disease, EVEN IF s/he says you may choose to "wait and see" if other symptoms develop, TAKE THE MEDICINE, AND TAKE IT IMMEDIATELY.
See, what my doctor
didn't tell me is that even if I did get symptoms? They still might not definitively prove whether or not I had Lyme disease. And even if I did take a blood test? It might not absolutely establish whether or not I had Lyme disease. The only way to be really, truly, absolutely sure if you have Lyme disease, you see, is 1) to be a person in which the disease spreads rapidly enough to be detected by whatever point at which you proceed to be tested for the disease, or 2) to get the disease so thoroughly and so badly that it may become difficult to annihilate once tests do indicate the presence of the nasty little bacteria that cause such an unpleasant and diverse range of symptoms in so many people.
Now, in case you're thinking I've been reading too damn many "scare" sites in which people who have Lyme disease or only
think they have it, and I've not been reading enough actual,
medical sites, you would be wrong. While I do flop onto many a scientifically-questionable website, I also make every damn effort to get away from those as fast as possible and focus on MD-approved information, especially when I intend to rebroadcast it in the form of a Public Service Announcement. I don't like looking like an idiot, and since I inadvertently do that with distressing frequency, when I have at least some semblance of advertence—yes, I made that word up, but you can extrapolate its made-up meaning from context—I do my best to avoid a repeat idiot performance.
Here's the thing: Lyme disease, in its advanced stages, is a Very Bad Thing. It can be chronically debilitating, and it becomes increasingly difficult to get rid of as it disseminates throughout your system. Therefore, if you're suspicious and you talk to a doctor and the
doctor supports your suspicion, you should NOT delay treatment; sure, you might be wrong, but the
CDC itself says that "Lyme disease is diagnosed based on symptoms", as well as physical findings (like
erythema migrans, aka, "the rash"), and possible exposure to infected ticks. Furthermore, the CDC says: "Validated laboratory tests can be very helpful but are
not generally recommended when a patient has erythema migrans." And that means you don't need a blood test to be
officially diagnosed with Lyme disease, particularly when you have a rash (such as I did), and more importantly, you should NOT wait until you have a positive blood test, because at that point, you may have harmful bacteria partyin' like rock stars ALL OVER YOUR BODY, wreaking havoc while they raise hell.
By now you have certainly and rightfully gathered that I did almost everything wrong. You may have also correctly concluded that even though I did get a blood test, it wasn't positive, and negative with a Lyme test doesn't so much mean "Yay, I'm safe!" It could just as easily mean, "Wow, I'm slow." (Yes, I know what you're thinking, and I'm flipping you off even though I often say the same thing myself.)
Although you don't need to know, if you choose to heed my red-lettered screaming message above, I'm going to tell you anyway, because it illustrates another reason why you should take the damn antibiotics already: Murphy—of "Murphy's Law" fame—is a bastard, 'cause he's right, and that's why you shouldn't wait to develop symptoms. Because you WILL, and they will develop on FRIDAY NIGHT, and you'll be on a camping trip, and you'll have joint and muscle pain like you do with fevers, only it won't just be in one knuckle as you clench your alcoholic beverage in your clammy grip, but it will zip out of your fingers and into your wrists and elbows. It will grab at your biceps and stab at your ankles. Your calves will seize up for absolutely no reason with just as much vigor as if you'd been
running a damn marathon after not training for the last four weeks preceding it, and you'll KNOW something's wrong, even when you finally manage to drink enough that you dull the "aches"—too mild a word for it by far—enough so that you quit flinching in your lawn chair.
You don't need to justify it to anyone, not even yourself. If you feel something's wrong and the doctor agrees, TAKE THE FUCKING MEDICATION, and don't bother with the blood test. If you wait until you test positive, you do yourself a disservice, as statistically, you've got
only a little better than a 50/50 chance of doing so—EVEN WHEN YOU ARE INFECTED—within four weeks of infection (assuming I'm reading all this stuff correctly ... I is not a doctor, remember).
Also? Please wake up just for one more minute, because this is important, too:
The "characteristic" bull's-eye rash of Lyme disease is notpresent in a significant proportion of people infected with the disease (actual numbers vary, and continue to be disputed), and not only that, but a uniform rash with NO central clearing occurs more commonly than a bull's-eye rash.
After obtaining my antibiotics, I waited an extra day so I could be tested. I wanted a peace of mind that I didn't realize was
still unlikely to be had, even with a blood test, even though I waited for symptoms and I waited until approximately four weeks post-(possible)-infection. And all of that waiting was SO not worth it when I could have taken the antibiotics and been done with it ... I could have bypassed a four-day period of near-constant, free-ranging aches and pains, the strength and intensity of which I had been previously and blissfully unaware. I could have gone directly to collecting the closest thing to certainty of NOT having Lyme disease by just TAKING the antibiotics when they were originally offered to me. Antibiotics which, I Trivial-Pursuit®-ishly add, also protect me from anthrax while I'm taking them. Bonus!
My one regret is that for a few days prior to the aches up to a few days after I started taking the antibiotics, my long-attendant insomnia had all but disappeared. I never felt "exhausted," or that I would fall asleep at any given moment, but I could and did—miraculously for me—drink caffeinated beverages ALL DAY, and still fall blissfully asleep every night, just after Little Girl did. AND, I enjoyed a 1-2 hour nap every day as well. The aches are thankfully all but gone now, but OH, do I miss that amazing, short-lived foray into effortless sleep.
Be well, people. And please, do as I say, not as I do. ;)