| I am chiming in from Dusseldorf just in from the hotel Bier Garten!
I think the lab is interested to obtain chocolates to possibly do similar tests like GIA did.
The problem with the chocolates is the way they are processed. It probably would not matter, but they are very hot right now thanks to designers like Erica Courtney. This also makes the business big money.
There are two types of chocolate Tahitian pearls. Those that have had color added, and those that have had color removed. The original chocolates are of the color-removed variety. The copycats are those that have had color added. They say the color-added pearls often come out of China, but they are coming out of Japan as well.
What is the difference? To me, I still say they are both treated. Why the uproar? Emiko Pearl (the big US distributor of color-removed chocolates) collected pearls from competitors, presented them to the GIA for testing, and proved that their pearls are different. Emiko is a member of CPAA, so the CPAA backed them up (of course) and then took it to the AGTA (I believe it was the AGTA...). Now disclosure is required at the Tucson show. But there are two kinds. One will say color treated (the "fake" chocolates), and one will say something like bleached.
There is the "Chocolates" article in last Winter's Gems and Gemology. I would advise against attempting to wade through the feature article and go straight to the blurb in gem notes. It will tell everyone who is not a lab techie a better story.
There is also an article in the last Modern Jeweler about chocolates. The issue also has an entire feature section on pearls. Unfortunately it is full of mistakes though. But it is a nice feature. |