Right, I'm back. I decided against the pizza. I decided to have a curry, which was mild other than the Carolina Reaper pepper in it.
This whole 'debate' show was a farce. In what was, presumably, a show intended to 'clarify all doubt' about the stone, it's actually made me even more sceptical.
First of all, Troth showed a supposed excerpt of what the lady had written in a letter - but all they showed was a random quote in the middle of a blank white screen. If this letter was genuine, why not show the letter "as is", with everything, other than the quote they wanted to show, redacted by blocking the remaining text out in black. That would have shown that the letter was genuine.
They then showed what was supposed to be a letter, from the lady to Gemporia, saying that the lab had confirmed that what she had bought was genuine. But, again, all they showed was a quote on the screen. At no point did they actually show the letter.
BUT this is where they really screwed up. When they put the supposed letter from the lady to Gemporia on screen, above the quote, it had the "AnchorCert Gem Lab" logo above it. Now, if, as they claim, this letter was from the woman to Gemporia, why on earth did it have an "AnchorCert Lab" logo on the letter? The only letter with that logo would have been the response from AnchorCert to the lady!
Now for more scepticism................
At no point was the lady's name mentioned. She wasn't even referred to as Mrs X from Salisbury or Mrs X from Aberystwyth. We have no idea who she is, or where she's from - or even if she actually really exists.
But we do know that Gemporia are half an hour away from Birmingham. A quick Google tells me that AnchorLab are part of the Assay Office - in Birmingham.
We also know that the Birmingham Assay Office do a lot of work with Gemporia. They:
a) Hallmark their jewellery.
b) Give independent valuations of Gemporia's jewellery.
c) Have a close relationship with Steve Bennett - as Steve Bennett used to openly mention on-air years ago.
The lady could have sent her jewellery to any lab in the country, or even the world. She could have also popped it into any Jewellers shop for them to pass on to their partner labs (this is the route most people would go down, because they wouldn't have a clue how to go about sending jewellery to a lab to be identified). However, she just so happened to choose the lab that Gemporia have ties with? Sure, it could be genuine - but it could also be a bit too coincidental. That's for other people to make their mind up.
Regardless of any that, one thing has been proven from the certificate they showed on-air today - the Jadeite that they've been pushing as untreated appears to be waxed. The certificate clearly states "Untreated other than wax".
Now, Gemporia's argument may be that as the wax is only a coating on the surface of the stone, and doesn't actually become part of the stone, then it isn't really a treatment - however, Sleeping Beauty Turquoise is also waxed - and they openly declare that under their treatments. So why the inconsistency?
If waxing is considered a treatment by Gemporia, then they need to disclose it on EVERYTHING they sell that is waxed.
If waxing is NOT considered a treatment by Gemporia, then they need to remove it from on-screen graphics and documentation as a treatment, on EVERYTHING that they sell.
They can't pick and choose when they feel that something is or isn't a treatment - because it breaks all trust, and it alienates customers. It also creates scepticism such as all that that has arisen with the Jadeite.
So this is where I suspect that this lady has been confused with the Jade that she bought. I strongly suspect that BOTH labs have confused her slightly by being vague. I suspect that the first lab noticed the waxing - and, incorrectly, told her that it was Type B/C because of that treatment. I also suspect that the AnchorCert lab have now confused her into thinking that it is natural / untreated - but that lab certificate is VERY misleading and vague by saying "Untreated other than wax". Whether that wax penetrates into the stone or not, that wax has formed a coating that has been applied with human intervention - therefore, it is not 'untreated'.
Applying vague terms to certificates of authenticity such as 'Untreated other than wax' sets a bad precedent for the industry and opens a HUGE can of worms. ANY treatment is treatment. It's irrelevant how minimal or harsh that treatment is. Therefore, it MUST, and SHOULD ALWAYS be disclosed.
This is why I've been screaming out for the industry to be regulated for years.