spoken to and appeared “O.K.” during the 7:30 a.m. and 8:00 a.m observations. J.A. at 288-89, 291, 741. Even with the benefit of hindsight, Dr. Ismailoglu testified that Stanford’s seizure at 8:10 a.m on April 26, 1998 was “the first concrete evidence that there was a neurological disorder going on.” J.A. at 674 (Ismailoglu Dep. at 60:22-24). In short, nothing in this record supports the conclusion that Lindsay had inferred the existence of a substantial risk of serious harm. With respect to Lindsay’s phone call to Dr. Ismailoglu, the record does support a conclusion that the sergeant may have failed to relate all relevant information concerning Stanford’s condition. There is no evidence, however, that Lindsay’s omissions were deliberate. See Estelle, 429 U.S. at 106, 97- S.Ct. 285 (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, while the record might support a
holding that the eighth amendment protects prisoners only from deliberate indifference to their serious medical needs holding that in order to state a violation of the eighth amendment an inmate must demonstrate that prison officials showed deliberate indifference to serious medical needs holding that prisoner must allege acts or omissions evidencing deliberate indifference to serious medical needs holding that a sentence of incarceration would constitute deliberate indifference to defendants medical needs holding that deliberate indifference to prisoners medical needs is cruel and unusual punishment