{"id":62,"date":"2012-02-16T17:46:20","date_gmt":"2012-02-16T17:46:20","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/userblogs.ganoksin.com\/antoinettematlins\/?p=62"},"modified":"2012-02-19T21:34:22","modified_gmt":"2012-02-19T21:34:22","slug":"62","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/userblogs.ganoksin.com\/antoinettematlins\/2012\/02\/16\/62\/","title":{"rendered":"BREAKING NEWS!\u00a0Matlins\u2019 Ruby Expos\u00e9 on ABC Confirmed by GIA: Lead-Glass Rubies Now Categorized as Manufactured, Artificial Product"},"content":{"rendered":"

As many of you are aware, Craig Lynch and I have been heading the Accredited Gemologists Association\u2019s (AGA) efforts in fighting\u2014for over four years\u2014to have laboratories classify lead-glass \u201cruby\u201d as an artificial product. We, along with other AGA members, have written extensively for the trade press and have given workshops all over the country to alert the trade and public about these artificial products\u2014our main objective being to prevent buyers from becoming victims of deception and to help them avoid costly mistakes. The first respected gemological laboratory to take a clear stand was the American Gemological Laboratory (AGL) in New York, who identified the material as something apart from ruby, calling it \u201ccomposite ruby\u201d with full disclosure as to what the material actually was. It was AGL\u2019s Chris Smith who agreed to appear with me on Good Morning America<\/em> almost three years ago to inform the public about this issue when it seemed the trade was turning a blind eye and wouldn\u2019t clearly separate the artificial products from other material.\u00a0Europe\u2019s GemLab of Liechtenstein and Switzerland soon joined in the effort to clearly identify the material, adding details to its reports\u00a0 relating to the percentage of glass in the particular stone.<\/p>\n

Until recently, it has been a long and agonizing effort to get other major labs to take a stand on this product. \u00a0This is why, after such a long and arduous journey, I was happy to see the European community announce almost a year ago that these products could not be sold as \u201cnatural ruby\u201d\u2014treated or otherwise. But, there was still a gaping hole: GIA was still identifying the product as \u201ccorundum,\u201d variety ruby, on their reports, albeit with comments about glass and the need for care. Nonetheless, their identification of the material was ruby and so the unscrupulous continued to deceive and exploit trade and consumers alike.<\/p>\n

A few days ago, I read with a sense of joy that the GIA are now calling these products a \u201cmanufactured\u201d! This is a huge milestone, as any other lab that refused to identify the lead-glass rubies \u00a0will have no choice but to follow GIA\u2019s advisory. \u00a0GIA also released a great video, which makes their report very clear: http:\/\/www.gia.edu\/media\/videos\/GD-Lead-Glass-Filled-Ruby.html<\/a>.<\/p>\n

If you want to have some fun, you should compare it to what was said on the Good Morning America<\/em> segment three years ago: http:\/\/abcnews.go.com\/GMA\/ConsumerNews\/rubies-real-deal\/story?id=8988951<\/a>.<\/p>\n

GIA\u2019s statement this week is a \u201cmajor step for mankind\u201d \u2026 Okay, maybe that\u2019s a stretch; I couldn\u2019t resist!<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"