• Gary Moller

How to Build Consensus and Collaboration

It's complicated: much more complicated than a jab, then thinking it is over - problem solved! Yeah-right!

During the Accident Compensation Commission's start-up during the 1970s, we quickly realised that claims for back injuries cost the country millions of dollars (I was responsible for setting up ACC's sports and recreation injury and rehabilitation programmes). At the time, there were a thousand and one therapies, all claiming success for treating back pain, but the problem was getting worse - not better. So, what did we do?

ACC became the sponsor of just about every health-related annual conference for the next few years - physiotherapy, sports medicine, occupational health, occupational therapists, and more. For example, we sponsored an international orthopaedic surgery conference. Guess what the themes were? Right, you guessed it: Back Pain and Back Injuries! I attended every one of these conferences.

Every health professional with an opinion about the prevention, treatment and rehabilitation of back injuries had at least one opportunity to present their ideas, research and treatment methods before their peers. It was the duty of their peers to respectfully and thoroughly dissect and challenge their case. But, of course, no conference of this kind ends without agreement which becomes the conference's statement of consensus and their call to action.

While each of these organisations did their thing at the "front line" after these conferences, ACC set up and ran a national awareness campaign to support their efforts: "Bend your knees and not your back" and "Don't use your back like a crane". In addition, we hired weight-lifting champion Precious McKenzie and the terrifying professional wrestler Len Ring to travel the country, mainly teaching young men how to lift safely at work. Some of you may still remember this national safety campaign.

This strategy was effective: back injury claims, while still costly to ACC, levelled off, and there were improvements in treatment and rehabilitation, including surgical techniques. So why don't we do something similar with COVID-19?

Is our leadership building consensus or treating us like sheep?

Instead of building consensus among health professionals, they crush dissent and have created an unthinking flock of five million, governed by fear, coercion and misinformation. They remind health professionals almost daily that not toeing the line may draw censure by their professional association. Health professionals who have not yet had the jab are being isolated then picked off, one by one, with threats that they will lose their job if they don't comply. Some have already lost their jobs.

Main Stream Media (MSM) is now the Government's attack dog, savaging any health professional who questions the official narrative. Here is the most recent example of several:


And here as well: