PER CURIAM. Arkansas inmate James McAlphin appeals from the final judgment entered in the District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action after an evidentiary hearing. McAlphin claimed that defendants were deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs. For the reasons discussed below, we affirm the judgment of the district court. After careful review of the record, we agree with the district court that McAlphin failed to show defendants disregarded his serious medical needs. See Jolly v. Knudsen, 205 F.3d 1094, 1096 (8th Cir.2000) (Eighth Amendment standard).
Instead, the medical records show that, although McAlphin tested positive for tuberculosis in 1995, he received drug therapy treatment for it, he was evaluated annually, and his 2002 and 2003 x-rays and sputum tests showed that the disease was not active. Moreover, although he also tested positive for both e-coli and H. pylori, one defendant testified that McAlphin experienced no harm from the e-coli and that she afforded him standard and successful treatment for H. pylori. See Logan v.
Clarke, 119 F.3d 647, 649-50 (8th Cir.1997) (prison doctors were not deliberately indifferent because they treated prisoner on numerous occasions and offered sensible medication and treatment). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47A(a). . The Honorable William R. Wilson, Jr., United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Jerry W. Cavaneau, United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.