This diagnosis has a reputation as dreadful as the one of cancer or A.I.D.S., hence its indispensable re-reading in the light of the biological laws. At the origin of multiple sclerosis (CF3), the conflict of feeling hindered, imprisoned, has two faces: the inability to suffer a situation and the powerlessness to extricate oneself by means of an appropriate attitude, be it in the sense of an arrangement, of a fight or of a flight. Those two aspects (sensory and motory) reflect on the cortical areas of the sensitiveness and of the voluntary musculation (striated muscles). The proportions of the motory and sensory disorders vary according to the prevailing facet, but generally the sensory disorders are less spectacular than the pareses and paralyses of the disease. As it is for all the other affections, the history is personal: to be caught by insurmountable debts or deprived following dishonest manœuvres, to be left alone with a baby without much means for living, to feel forced to live in a house, to experience a family relation or a professional situation as oppressing, etc… But the conflict is always the typical painful feeling: "I can not bear it and I can not get out of it". The localisation of the affected muscles expresses the nuances in the impossibility to react: flee with the lower limbs, push back with the upper limbs, avoid with the back, etc…

As soon as the conflict is solved, sensitiveness and motricity restore but only after a worsening period due to cerebral oedema. This period is often the moment of diagnosis and explains the therapeutic success of cortisone. But this is only possible in the second phase and one may consequently understand the various results of this treatment: applied in the first phase, it will entail an increase of the symptoms and, if the conflict is in balance, there will be no clear action. Rather than a routine prescription – and presented as the main therapy in the sole "upsurges" of a disease moreover inexorable – this cortisone may be useful to relieve the worsening period as well as the hyperfunctioning symptoms of the second phase: itching, smarting and hyperesthesia for the sensitiveness; wrangling and painful spasms for the motricity.

The S.E.P. problem is not only within its initial conflict, which may present all the degrees of intensity and of re-stimulation frequency being at the origin of the relapses. It is, at first, complicated by the risk of a vicious circle: if the patient feels handicapped by the temporary increase of his paralysis, he may plunge again into his conflict. The worst, however, lies in the iatrogenous impact. Within the reality of the initial symptomatology, the importance between a mild lameness and the use of two crutches is enormous, but this difference depends on the difference between conflicts. The neurological discourse, on the other hand, is literally unsustainable: a destruction of the nervous system by our immunity; an unknown origin with a hypothesis combining remote – and the more insecuring - factors such as hereditary ones and infections during youth; the unpredictability during its evolution and the sudden impulse of its manifestations; the vagueness in the relations between objective lesions (the stains of the magnetic resonance that are in fact cicatrices of secundary devalorisation conflicts) and symptoms and, finally, the long-term incurability. Pessimism reinforced by a psychological "support" jointed around the necessity to adapt, oneself and one’s environment, to an unexpected infirmity. All this is sufficient to root and to amplify a conflict becoming very much insoluble since the guarantee (even far off if one has the chance to suffer from a slow form of the disease) of the wheelchair revives the experience of an unbearable situation one will not be able to feel anymore!