I don't actually know what the IMU calibration accomplishes. Maybe my view that a calibration won't fix this is a sublimated form of confirmation bias. I've not seen a case where there is compelling evidence that a calibration fixed a problem. This is the first time I've seen an accelerometer bias this large. It's be interesting to see if that bias is removed or reduced.
About 4 years ago I did some experiments with my P3A. At the time many people thought an absolutely level surface was required for calibration. In my experiments the calibration was performed on a surface that was 5° off level. The subsequent flight tests did not show any drifting or erratic flight. With present day Mavics it's hard to even know what an absolutely level orientation would be.
Some accelerometer bias shouldn't be a problem. E.g., hovering isn't achieved by getting the X and Y accelerometers to show 0.0. The present flight illustrates this. Not withstanding the wind calcs problem there was no drifting, erratic flight, etc. The uncommanded altitude changes are a bit suspicious though.
It's possible that a calibration determines the noise profile of the accelerometers. Knowing this could be used to set the gains in the Kalman filters being used by the Flight Controller.