NZDSOS-ACC Email Thread for the Record

NZDSOS

In view of the evolving national catastrophe of death and disability we are dealing with as 2025 kicks in, it is very painful – but important –  to revisit an early prescient attempt to forewarn and prepare one government department, our national injury insurer, the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC). 

We take zero pleasure in having anticipated problems – not least because of the subsequent harms and the time and stress involved now in trying to help some of the many obviously jab injured who are being refused and otherwise mucked about by ACC.

There is a huge number, of real people with wrecked lives, who are damaged and bereaved, and the numbers will only grow. We meet and hear from many who are refused ACC cover, egregiously so and despite the clarity of their history. No doubt the initial budget is blown already, with $11.5 million paid out to over a thousand claimants. However, shortly after the email exchange below, the government was shown to be planning for a 1.1 per cent serious injury rate leading to chronic disability. Almost certainly this was based on the early reporting to VAERS in the US, although no officials had called out any safety signal. Let’s say 1.1 per cent of four million eligible = 44 000. If each receives only $10k from ACC or WINZ that would be $440 million already. (It should also be noted that $10k is a pathetic amount for someone who has been injured for life and may not be able to work again, e.g., stroke, heart failure, neurological syndromes.)

Someone should have told the Medical Council of NZ who flagged the jab around then as a zero risk product. That hasn’t aged well and perhaps ACC should chat to the Medical Council about recovering some of its costs. But we discovered the MCNZ seems to be run from the FSMB in the USA, via IAMRA, where MCNZ CEO Joan Simeon is the current chair. The link features NZDSOS Dr Bruce Dooley, who, it is no surprise, is now the subject of another attack by the MCNZ as we go to press in 2025.

Dear ACC Minister,

I am a Wellington GP, and on behalf of my peer review group I am writing to ask you to confirm that ACC will cover patients for any harm from the investigational/experimental Covid-19 gene therapy vaccines being rolled out. 

There is talk of some overseas insurance companies refusing cover for vaccine injuries or death on the grounds that side effects and their frequency are as yet unknown due to emergency use authorisation (EUA) in the absence of the usual phase III clinical trials, and therefore impossible to underwrite actuarially. 

The issue of obtaining true informed consent from patients arises for the same reasons. 

XXXXXX has advised us that we are indemnified professionally since the government has bought the vaccines and is driving the roll-out, but that our consent forms for patients ought to reflect that it is not possible to be certain what side effects may emerge in the short, medium and long term from taking an investigational drug under an EUA.

Thank you for providing whatever clarity you can on this issue. 

Kind Regards

Dr Matt Shelton

Dear Dr Matt Shelton

Thank you for your email which has been referred to us here at ACC for a response.

A physical injury resulting from a vaccination, including the Covid-19 vaccine, may be covered by ACC if the criteria for treatment injury are met. Under ACC legislation, the injury must be clearly caused by the vaccination and must not be a necessary part or ordinary consequence of the treatment.

For example, inflammation around the site of the injection is common with vaccinations (an ordinary consequence) and is unlikely to be covered. Infections (such as cellulitis or septic arthritis) due to the vaccination, and anaphylaxis resulting in injury are not ordinary consequences and are likely to be covered. 

If a patient has an injury that meets these criteria, they may require further treatment or support. If so, an ACC2152 treatment injury claim form should be lodged with ACC as well as an electronic or manual ACC45 injury claim form.

ACC needs to know the Covid-19 vaccine brand name and vaccination dose number (i.e., dose one or two) to support its reporting. This can be noted:

• on the ACC45: please tick the treatment injury box, identify this as an adverse event in the drop-down menu and then enter the Covid-19 vaccine brand name and vaccination dose number in the open comments section
• on the ACC2152: in Section 3 – Treatment claimed to have caused the injury.

For more information on lodging a treatment injury claim please refer to the following links:

•  https://www.acc.co.nz/for-providers/lodging-claims/lodging-a-claim-for-a-patient/#treatment-injuries
• ACC2152 form: https://www.acc.co.nz/assets/provider/3e3bd2aded/acc2152-treatment-injury-claim.doc
•  ACC Treatment Injury Claim Lodgement Guide: https://www.acc.co.nz/assets/provider/405074f420/treatment-injury-claim-lodgement-guide.pdf

For any specific queries contact ACC on 0800 222 070 or email providerhelp@acc.co.nz

Kind Regards

Cheryl Gall

Dear Cheryl,

Thanks for your reply.

However, given the unprecedented roll-out of an investigational treatment, where the national population is being coerced, by any definition, into what is the phase 3 clinical trial, without ANY degree of the usual paperwork implicit in clinical trials, and with a factually incorrect “consent form” being given to patients, we believe there are grave risks – medical, moral and legal – that patients, government ministers, leaders at MOH, ACC, MBIE and indeed all vaccinators are being exposed to. It is not our job as practitioners to teach an insurance company about risk assessment of course, but we are concerned that our vaccinated patients may have to fight not just any health challenges if injured, but also against an unwilling and unprepared national insurer. A recent example of an emerged group of injured patients who had to fight very hard for recognition and compensation, often whilst dealing with disabling and severe symptoms, were the women injured by the reactions to J&J’s surgical mesh used in pelvic surgery. These reactions did not show up in the clinical trials of the surgical mesh before approval. The manufacturers’ phase 3 clinical trials of the mRNA Covid vaccines are not due to report until 2023.

From our perspective in primary care, where we are often the patient advocate of last resort, we are very concerned that ACC will not be willing or able to function on behalf of any patients injured during this clinical trial of novel mRNA therapies. We have had specific advice from the Medical Protection Society that we ought to inform vaccinees they are taking an experimental treatment, the adverse effects from which are as yet unknown. This is contradictory to the MOH-authored consent form which states that the Covid-19 vaccines have been subjected to the same testing and safety standards as registered vaccines.

It appears that little preparation work has been done, or at least made public, around the potential for harm to arise. Even a cursory look at the legislation around the emergency use authorization of investigational therapies demonstrates various breaches that would seem to create legal liabilities for government, from the roll-out so far. We also understand that the legal principle of medical malfeasance, of a health worker deliberately exposing a patient to harm without establishing truthful informed consent, or of “just” not using usual care and consideration, may still supersede the principle of no-fault compensation, and lead to court action against individuals. Indeed, ACC have advised patients to do this specifically, on past occasions.

Of course we all hope and expect that a catastrophe does not befall the nation, but at the very least we would not want to become tied-up in extremely time-consuming and stressful work on behalf of patients battling ACC. Our job in primary care is already hard enough.

Kind regards

Matt Shelton

Dear Matt

Thank you for the follow-up email.

We have noted your concerns and they have been shared with the team involved in planning for the likely impact to clients and ACC of any claims for adverse reactions to the vaccine.

Kind regards

Cheryl Gall

This article was originally published by New Zealand Doctors Speaking Out With Science.