Arkansas inmate John Harris appeals the district court’s 1 dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1988 action following an eviden-tiary hearing. Because Harris did not make a jury demand, we review the district court’s factual findings for clear error and its conclusions of law de novo. See *412 Choate v. Lockhart, 7 F.3d 1370, 1373 & n. 1 (8th Cir. 1993). Harris claimed that Nurse Shirley Crawford was deliberately indifferent to his serious medical need when she administered a TB skin-injection test to him, even though she knew he would have a positive reaction, and that she did not properly treat his arm in the days following the injection. He claimed that his arm became swollen, red, and painful, and that he has a permanent scar from the injection. We agree with the district court that Harris did not show the TB test posed a substantial risk of serious harm, see Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 832-33, 837, 114 S.Ct. 1970, 128 L.Ed.2d 811 (1994); Helling v. McKinney, 509 U.S. 25, 36, 113 S.Ct. 2475, 125 L.Ed.2d 22 (1993), and that Harris did not show Crawford denied him proper treatment in the days following the injection, see Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 106, 97 S.Ct. 285, 50 L.Ed.2d 251 (1976).

Accordingly, we affirm.