T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
738.1 | | CSC32::S_BROOK | There and back to see how far it is | Fri May 06 1994 13:43 | 20 |
| What shot ?
Lyme disease is treated if caught ... but as far as I knew there
was no "preventive medicine" only prevention ... ie keep your
legs covered, check for ticks on bare areas routinely when out
(every hour or two). If you find a tick, remove it by grasping it
by the head with tweezers and pull.
If a "bulls eye" mark develops around the site of the tick bite,
then go to the Dr for testing and treatment.
That's it ... no shots.
I don't want to sound rude, but where does your mil get her medical
info ??? (That's not meant to be answered ... just something to think
about)
Stuart
|
738.2 | Prevention | OBSESS::COUGHLIN | Kathy Coughlin-Horvath | Fri May 06 1994 14:07 | 15 |
|
I live in a rural area and am very careful about ticks. This time of the year
the deer tick(the one causing Lyme disease) is very small so it can be difficult
to see them. If walking in the woods it is best to be completely covered,
including and especially the head and neck. In meadows/long grass, or the
border of grass and woods long pants are best. It is easiest to check for ticks
wearing light colored clothing. They can be anywhere - trees, bushes, grass.
It is true, there are not shots for prevention. If you have a dog, you should
check it every day as ticks love dogs. This is not only for the dog's benefit,
but the tick can fall off the dog and go on a human. My outdoor cat has never
had a tick.
Kathy
|
738.3 | | GAVEL::PCLX31::satow | gavel::satow, dtn 223-2584 | Fri May 06 1994 14:13 | 4 |
| In addition to replies you may get here, Parenting_V3, note 1018.* might be
of interest to you.
Clay
|
738.4 | | NOTAPC::PEACOCK | Freedom is not free! | Fri May 06 1994 14:24 | 16 |
| Well, I usually don't try to give too much advise, but something in
the base note just sits strangely with me...
If the woman lives in an area that is known to be at risk, then why
would she even consider taking a 6mo old child on walks into the
woods?
Why take such an obvious risk when avoiding the risk is nothing more
than a decision away? Especially out in the area around Ashby - I
don't know much about that area, but I don't recall that excessive
traffic is one of their top ten problems... why not chose a less risky
walk?
Just wondering,
- Tom
|
738.5 | more input | FMAJOR::WALTER | used to be Aquilia | Fri May 06 1994 14:30 | 21 |
| Tom, my MIL has a beautiful house that is in the "woods" so to speak.
Her driveway is stone but she has several acres of fields, probably
what she meant by "woods" that she strolls with the children in during
the day with paths that have been created in the last year or so. Paul
is usually in the pack on her back and the other two children are old
enough to walk around. I agree that covering him will probably be the
best way to prevent ticks from getting on him. I don't mind her
walking with them as its great for them to be outside in the fresh air.
As far as her medical degree and unwanted advise, I have just taken it
stride after my episode with teething (see note 74) but thought I would
check it out in here anyways, you never know and can't be too careful.
On a completely different subject, her dogs did indeed get a shot but
it was probably for rabies now that I think about, she just got it
wrong!
thanks for the input,
cj
|
738.6 | Possible confusion? | TLE::MENARD | new kid on the COMMON block | Fri May 06 1994 14:34 | 15 |
| ... not that I want to get in the middle of anything between you and
your mother-in-law, but is it possible that she was confused by a news
story?
There *is* a shot for dogs to protect against Lyme disease, but not
one for humans yet (my vet says it's because it's easier to get doggy
volunteers ;-) ) There are tests that can be done if you *think* you
may have contracted it - a few years back, I, uh, well nature called,
and I unfortunately found myself in a patch of poison-something, and
I ended up with a rash across my back-end. A Dr saw it, and said that
it was just a little suspicious looking (it had a bulls-eye look to it),
and gave me a test for Lyme. (it was negative)
I don't know what facility you are at, but the ZKO Nurse's office
has a little pamphlet on Lyme. You might check at your facility.
- Lorri
|
738.7 | ... or maybe completely uncovered | MOIRA::FAIMAN | light upon the figured leaf | Fri May 06 1994 14:49 | 49 |
| .2:
> to see them. If walking in the woods it is best to be completely covered,
> including and especially the head and neck. In meadows/long grass, or the
On the other hand, we have the following (posted last year in the Usenet
rec.nude newsgroup):
From: [email protected] (Thomas Walter)
Subject: "Outdoor types wishing to avoid tick bites... " - Oregonian 4-8-93
Date: 8 Apr 93 21:06:03 GMT
Organization: Open Communications Forum
From the Oregonian - Thursday April 8, 1993
Outdoor types wishing to avoid tick bites should dare to go bare.
It may be that the best way to avoid being bitten by a deer tick
and contracting Lyme disease is to shed all of one's clothing and
walk naked when visiting the woods.
That possibility, through it goes against standard advice to wear
long-sleeved shirts and long pants, was raised in the Journal of
the American Medical Association by Dr. Henry Feder Jr. of the
University of COnnecticut Health Center.
In a visit to a Connecticut nudist camp attended by more than 300
campers, Feder found only one case of infection even though the
camp was ideally suited to spawn the ticks.
"Why are deer tick bites so unusual at this Connecticut nudist camp?"
Feder asks. "one explanation is that although deer are present, deer
ticks are not yet established. A second explanation is that deer ticks
do not like nudist, as ticks prefer to do their biting under cover.
"A tick surveillance study is being planned"
-- From staff and wire reports [This is in the Science section, under
the "Research Notebook" heading].
* Hmm, maybe the camping bares have know this all along? *
Cheers,
Tom Walter [email protected]
Beaverton, OR.
|
738.8 | VAccine for humans being tested | GEMGRP::FRANKLIN | | Fri May 06 1994 16:28 | 15 |
| As stated previously, there is a shot for dogs. My in-laws live
in Conneticut and have had all of their dogs get the shot.
ALSO, there is now testing going on for a shot for *humans*. My
in-laws are paritcipating in the test. My father-in-law speculated
that he may have recieved the placebo wile my MIL probably received
the vaccine - because her arm reacted somehow to her shot. Since
this is purely in the *test* stages in places like CT where the
incidence of Lyme disease is higher, and, since it may have unkown
side effects, I doubt that it would be available or advisable to give
it to a 6 month old.
Perhaps your MIL heard about this shot and was not aware that it is
still in testing.
|
738.9 | silly story included, course it wasn't silly when it happened! | FMAJOR::WALTER | used to be Aquilia | Mon May 09 1994 10:30 | 20 |
| I guess she was right then because I talked to her again yesterday and
she said that she indeed did get a shot for all three dogs that was for
Lyme.
As for walking in the woods naked, hmm... interesting idea but I have
to agree with Lorri that its dangerous. I had a similar experience
days before my elopement. Got poison ivy in the same area and called
the dr's office to enquire about pills for it and they said that they
only give these pills out in extreme cases. I asked if getting married
was extreme enough and had the pills within the hour.
I know, different subject. :)
On another note, I don't think it would be a good idea to have a child
given this shot either, even if its o.k.'d in a short time. I think
its wiser just to be careful about where you go and how you dress.
cj
|