deliberate indifference toward a serious medical need of Mr. Thomas. Nurse DeLorenzo was asked to see Mr. Thomas because he told the guards that he was going through withdrawal. When DeLorenzo met with Mr. Thomas, she questioned him and took urine drug screens for both heroin and oxycodone — both came up negative (indicating that such drugs were not in Mr. Thomas’s system). See ECF No. 78-16, at 38-39. Since Nurse DeLorenzo investigated possible heroin withdrawal but found no evidence of the condition, it cannot be said that she was deliberately indifferent to a known condition of heroin withdrawal. While DeLorenzo “could conceivably be wrong, [s]he cannot consciously disregard a risk [s]he has found reason to believe does not exist.” Bearam v. Wigen, 542 Fed.Appx. 91, 92 (3d Cir.2013) (<HOLDING>). However, after DeLorenzo informed Mr. Thomas
holding that a medical professional was not deliberately indifferent where the prisoner alleged that the professional performed some investigation and determined that the prisoner does not have the condition he thinks he has holding that a medical professional clearly indicated an exercise of medical judgment rather than deliberate indifference where the medical professional engaged in a goodfaith clinical assessment of plaintiffs symptoms concluding on several visits that his condition did not warrant medication holding that a professional owes no duty to third persons unless the professional had actual knowledge that those persons would rely on his rendering of professional services holding prison official is deliberately indifferent if he knew that prisoner faced a substantial risk of harm and disregarded that risk holding that prisoner must show prison officials were deliberately indifferent to prison conditions to establish an eighth amendment violation