[switchbak]

Odd how the sibling comment got downvoted into oblivion for this, but you're right - prophylaxis is an option here, and last I checked it was the recommended course of action if you develop the bullseye ring. Note that the tests have high false negative rates, so still might be sensible if you have a negative test.

Of course, these antibiotics are not without risk too.

[lyme-educator]

Some points correcting what's been posted here and above. A single dose of Doxycycline is not an effective prophylactic. It failed me and other people I know (after my doctor and I read over the CDC guideline that was misinformation). The original study supporting it was poor regarding how it was established as effective (required the bullseye rash). The bullseye rash does not appear for everyone. Depending on the attach point/strength, ticks pass along bacteria and/or viruses in minutes. Testing the tick and monitoring yourself for symptoms is always a good practice. I prefer clothing & topical solutions vs ingested chemicals.

It would be nice to see support for natural consumption of ticks by fowl (chickens, turkeys, quail, etc), marsupial, etc.

[switchbak]

What I read was that the bullseye was considered sufficient evidence even without a positive test to administer antibiotics. I don't know the recommended dose, perhaps a single dose is not enough.

What exactly are you correcting here?