Memorial Diamonds out of Cremains - anyone do this? Need Info.

[lisa1.01fvs1]

Date: 6/18/2008 5:39:22 PM
Author: Alexei Zarakhani

Date: 6/18/2008 4:27:38 PM
Author: YourGemologist
Good point, Clark. Based on the information we have these are BARS presses that are located in Moscow, and not the 'cubic' presses of Sundance.


So there is far more going on here than we know.


Perhaps Rusty of LifeGem would care to explain how this image from Moscow became the picture of the 'LifeGem Diamond Lab' in Illinois?

Robert

Indeed, those are BARS presses at our research facility, pictures were taken in 2003. Those presses are still there, that's for sure.

What?????

Alexei, can't u guys get LifGem for copyright infringement or something?

Robert, Linda - I'm thinking of contacting local media here in Los Angeles (wouldn't this make for a juicy story). Any tips?

It's so disgusting how their DVD starts w/ news broadcasts all over the nation touting them as true groundbreakers
who are doing this service from the deep compassion in their hearts. People of loved ones cry and tell sad sad stories about cancer
pts., children, spouses, pets.

 

[Alexei Zarakhani]

Date: 6/19/2008 12:23:35 AM
Author: lisa1.01fvs1

Date: 6/18/2008 5:39:22 PM

Author: Alexei Zarakhani

Date: 6/18/2008 4:27:38 PM

Author: YourGemologist

Good point, Clark. Based on the information we have these are BARS presses that are located in Moscow, and not the ''cubic'' presses of Sundance.



So there is far more going on here than we know.



Perhaps Rusty of LifeGem would care to explain how this image from Moscow became the picture of the ''LifeGem Diamond Lab'' in Illinois?

Robert

Indeed, those are BARS presses at our research facility, pictures were taken in 2003. Those presses are still there, that''s for sure.

What?????


Alexei, can''t u guys get LifGem for copyright infringement or something?

Unfortunately, not. Those pictures were in a public domain for several years. They were taken at the dawn of commercialization of synthetic diamonds for jewelry applications. Many doors were wide open for interested parties then, especially in the former USSR. If someone is interested how it all began I suggest to see a documentary "Diamond Deception" which was filmed in 1999 by BBC and then repackaged by Nova. Quite a good educational film featuring Gemesis and our lab.
Anyway, we will talk to LifeGem on that matter and see what can be done.

 

[sparxs111]

As far as media go, maybe the best people to contact would be the news stations that ran all the good publicity for them in the first place and they can find out if they were duped or not... NOthing like in depth digging by reporters to verify their sources and stories!!!

 

[lisa1.01fvs1]

Sparxs - excellent suggestion - I think one of them was Oprah!!!!!!!!

 

[Imdanny]

Date: 6/17/2008 12:05:28 PM
Author: YourGemologist
This alert was just sent out to the insurance industry. Since this thread is responsible for finally providing some answers to the questions, I thought I would share this with you all. Rj


Perhaps the most revealing statement was made to me personally in a phone conversation with Rusty VandenBiesen in response to my question, as a Texas P&C Insurance Adjuster, regarding what would happen in the event that a LifeGem was damaged or lost.



His response: “Oh we can make as many as you need. We keep the ashes on file here in the office”.

This is truly shocking and disgusting. Even if it were true, and I doubt that it is, who are these people to keep the ashes of one's loved one "on file here in the office"?

 

[ohiogirl461]

I found this very interesting. I thank all of you who asked questions and got down to the truth. I agree. It should be taken to the press.

In there letter they were talking in a circle. Everything went back to the fact that it depends on the amount of carbon and that all the ashes are different. I almost died laughing when I first read there response.

I also think they just barried themselves with there response.

Lastly. I think that there long gap of silence was to try and varify what they were NOT saying and an attempt for everyong to forget what they had once again NOT said.

Thanks everyone

 

[YourGemologist]

Alexei,

I would like to ask the same question of you that I did Clark:

Does your company have any relations with LifeGem? Do you now, or at any time in the past, have any agreement with LifeGem to supply them with synthetic diamonds?

Given that they are openly using your photograph it raises the question here. Mainly because you do have the ability to file a copyright violation on LifeGem. And I am a bit curious why you have not taken immediate steps on this issue?

Any clarification will be greatly appreciated as I am preparing the letter for the Illinois Attorney General office and this picture is going to be a major issue.

Robert

 

[Alexei Zarakhani]

Date: 6/23/2008 5:34:22 PM
Author: YourGemologist
Alexei,


I would like to ask the same question of you that I did Clark:


Does your company have any relations with LifeGem? Do you now, or at any time in the past, have any agreement with LifeGem to supply them with synthetic diamonds?


Given that they are openly using your photograph it raises the question here. Mainly because you do have the ability to file a copyright violation on LifeGem. And I am a bit curious why you have not taken immediate steps on this issue?


Any clarification will be greatly appreciated as I am preparing the letter for the Illinois Attorney General office and this picture is going to be a major issue.


Robert

Robert,

I have already answered similar questions earlier. Please see my posts on 6/11/2008 6:36:23 PM and 6/19/2008 12:23:35 AM. I hope you will find them satisfactory. Following our information policy concerning commercial and legal activities of our company I kindly ask you to excuse me from further non-educational questions on that matter at this educational forum. As I have already mentioned earlier, we will contact Lifegem at such a date and within such a framework as will be best suited for our company.

 

[YourGemologist]

Alexei,

Thank you for your response. I only asked the question since it surfaced that LifeGem is indeed using your photograph as their claimed “LifeGem Diamond Lab”. And this development post-dates your previous comments. As such, I was only asking if any further clarification was required due to the timing. Obviously it is not so I appreciate you allowing me to ask the question just to confirm.

As I am sure you are aware, LifeGem has admitted that they do not actually own any diamond making presses, which totally contradicts and negates all of their promotional materials. And since D.NEA DIAMONDS does make lab created diamonds, and LifeGem is using your photograph as their “LifeGem Diamond Lab”……it is not too far of a reach that someone would assume a connection if the issue is allowed to stand for any time at all.

I respect your company’s right to deal with this at “such a date and within such a framework” that you deem proper, as you stated.

But please understand that the longer LifeGem is permitted to use your photograph as their claimed “LifeGem Diamond Lab”, the more people are going to assume a collateral connection between LifeGem and D.NEA DIAMONDS.

I would urge you to make that date and framework you describe as timely as possible to avoid what we call the “appearance of evil” in this situation. It would be unfortunate if your fine company was implicated in the LifeGem situation for no other reason than your failure to enforce the copyrights of your image.
Robert

 

[Alexei Zarakhani]

Date: 6/24/2008 6:25:35 PM
Author: YourGemologist
Alexei,



As I am sure you are aware, LifeGem has admitted that they do not actually own any diamond making presses, which totally contradicts and negates all of their promotional materials. And since D.NEA DIAMONDS does make lab created diamonds, and LifeGem is using your photograph as their “LifeGem Diamond Lab”……it is not too far of a reach that someone would assume a connection if the issue is allowed to stand for any time at all.


I respect your company’s right to deal with this at “such a date and within such a framework” that you deem proper, as you stated.


But please understand that the longer LifeGem is permitted to use your photograph as their claimed “LifeGem Diamond Lab”, the more people are going to assume a collateral connection between LifeGem and D.NEA DIAMONDS.


I would urge you to make that date and framework you describe as timely as possible to avoid what we call the “appearance of evil” in this situation. It would be unfortunate if your fine company was implicated in the LifeGem situation for no other reason than your failure to enforce the copyrights of your image.

Robert

Robert,

Your suggestions are duly noted. However, we reserve a right to act at our discretion. Likewise, I would suggest not to substitute facts with assumptions and rush into conclusions. Public perception, factual and legal side of the same event do not always go hand in hand.

On a side note, for the sake of accuracy and education let me tell you the following:
1. D.Nea Diamonds does NOT make lab created diamonds.
2. The picture in question does NOT belong to us, it’s in public domain for almost five years. We can’t legally control and regulate how it is used.
3. It IS possible to establish an origin of a synthetic diamond, trace it to a producer. There are different methods available to accomplish that. For example, every manufacturer uses its own proprietary composition for a solvent. Therefore, a trace element analysis can tell the difference. And those will be facts, not assumptions or speculations.

 

[lisa1.01fvs1]

Date: 6/25/2008 9:58:27 AM
Author: Alexei Zarakhani

Date: 6/24/2008 6:25:35 PM
Author: YourGemologist

Alexei,



As I am sure you are aware, LifeGem has admitted that they do not actually own any diamond making presses, which totally contradicts and negates all of their promotional materials. And since D.NEA DIAMONDS does make lab created diamonds, and LifeGem is using your photograph as their “LifeGem Diamond Lab”……it is not too far of a reach that someone would assume a connection if the issue is allowed to stand for any time at all.


I respect your company’s right to deal with this at “such a date and within such a framework” that you deem proper, as you stated.


But please understand that the longer LifeGem is permitted to use your photograph as their claimed “LifeGem Diamond Lab”, the more people are going to assume a collateral connection between LifeGem and D.NEA DIAMONDS.


I would urge you to make that date and framework you describe as timely as possible to avoid what we call the “appearance of evil” in this situation. It would be unfortunate if your fine company was implicated in the LifeGem situation for no other reason than your failure to enforce the copyrights of your image.


Robert

Robert,

Your suggestions are duly noted. However, we reserve a right to act at our discretion. Likewise, I would suggest not to substitute facts with assumptions and rush into conclusions. Public perception, factual and legal side of the same event do not always go hand in hand.

On a side note, for the sake of accuracy and education let me tell you the following:
1. D.Nea Diamonds does NOT make lab created diamonds.
2. The picture in question does NOT belong to us, it’s in public domain for almost five years. We can’t legally control and regulate how it is used.
3. It IS possible to establish an origin of a synthetic diamond, trace it to a producer. There are different methods available to accomplish that. For example, every manufacturer uses its own proprietary composition for a solvent. Therefore, a trace element analysis can tell the difference. And those will be facts, not assumptions or speculations.

I think Alexei said on 6/11:

"We at D.Nea are not competitors to and have no relationship with LifeGem."

 

[YourGemologist]

Alexei,

Thanks for the clarifications. I totally agree with you. Please understand it needed to be stated very clearly that there is no link between you and LifeGem, particularly since this picture issue has been raised after your previous postings on the subject. If the BARS presses in this photograph (regardless of who owns the photograph) are yours, then a question could indeed be put forth as to a possible connection between you and LifeGem. But now that we have the clarification from you regarding the photograph, that establishes the issue on this forum as far as I am concerned.

Given additional information I have been provided on this LifeGem issue, it will be unfortunate if anyone is incorrectly tied to them over their use of a photograph that was not theirs to use.

I appreciate the further clarification.

Robert

 

[Alexei Zarakhani]

Date: 6/25/2008 7:32:06 PM
Author: YourGemologist


Given additional information I have been provided on this LifeGem issue, it will be unfortunate if anyone is incorrectly tied to them over their use of a photograph that was not theirs to use.


I appreciate the further clarification.


Robert

Robert,

Our business model is based on performance, on our ability to produce and market fine products and not on what-somebody-might-assume. So, the issue you so much care about is of extremely low significance to us.

Let me throw one more bone to you if you would like to continue this discussion. I find an idea to produce diamonds out of carbon-containing substances (ashes, hair, wood, peanut butter, etc.) to be brilliant. It may be a nice niche product if positioned and marketed correctly. We looked into it together with Bill Pearlman, he was exited. “Personalized” diamonds look very promising for a bridal market, for example. Technically it is all doable, you should have no doubt about that. All the stages of a process could be well documented and personalized carbon source can be easily traced from a starting material to a finished diamond. As for “personalized” carbon content in a resulting diamond, this issue can be resolved as follows – if there is enough amount of carbon to grow a diamond, a 100% “personalized” diamond can be grown; if the amount of carbon source will not be sufficient (this info should be disclosed to a client) then a client decides to do “quasi-personalized” diamond or not. So, disclosure, disclosure and disclosure and a client’s (and not of some forum posters) conscious decision to go ahead or not. Does anybody have problem with such an approach?

However, to implement a synthesis of custom made diamonds within a relatively large scale production capacity is not feasible. Custom orders will eventually interfere with processes and policies for no-name products and negatively impact overall performance of a diamond growing company. In other words, from a business standpoint there should be a separate dedicated facility to service such custom orders.

 

[YourGemologist]

Alexei,

The problem is not the technology. We all are aware that it can be done.

The problem is providing a sufficient level of accountability to consumers that it is, in fact, actually getting done.

LifeGem has proven just how easy it is to defraud consumers with this "LfeGem Diamond Lab" photograph that has been proven to be bogus. And at no point has LifeGem been able to actually show one iota of evidence that they actually deliver the product they claim.

And if they can do this kind of business, then so can you, me, and anyone else out there who knows how to do the schtick.

So while these issues may be low priority on your company''s list, they are very high on ours.

Consumers deserve better than what they have received on this LifeGem issue, and from the industry in general lately.

Robert

 

[Alexei Zarakhani]

Date: 6/26/2008 1:02:30 PM
Author: YourGemologist
Alexei,


The problem is not the technology. We all are aware that it can be done.


The problem is providing a sufficient level of accountability to consumers that it is, in fact, actually getting done.


LifeGem has proven just how easy it is to defraud consumers with this ''LfeGem Diamond Lab'' photograph that has been proven to be bogus. And at no point has LifeGem been able to actually show one iota of evidence that they actually deliver the product they claim.


And if they can do this kind of business, then so can you, me, and anyone else out there who knows how to do the schtick.


So while these issues may be low priority on your company''s list, they are very high on ours.


Consumers deserve better than what they have received on this LifeGem issue, and from the industry in general lately.


Robert

Robert,

Could you please define “a sufficient level of accountability”. Knowing basic steps of this process – graphitization, diamond synthesis, cutting – what would you consider to be sufficient?

Also, on your “...so can you, me, and anyone else out there who knows how to do the schtick” - absolutely right. Anybody can do it who can effectively organize and control the above-mentioned steps to run smoothly by outsourcing corresponding services. Do you see anything wrong with that model as long as a personalized carbon will be handled as such, can be traced throughout the whole process and its every step will be well documented.
I could name several companies offering similar services as LifeGem, none of them has its own production facilities. Are they all crooks in your opinion?

 

[YourGemologist]

Do you see anything wrong with that model as long as a personalized carbon will be handled as such, can be traced throughout the whole process and its every step will be well documented.
I could name several companies offering similar services as LifeGem, none of them has its own production facilities. Are they all crooks in your opinion?


Alexei
=========================================================

Alexei,

I'm afraid you are assuming facts not in evidence, and trying to side step the issue of this thread. It is an issue of accountability. Providing consumers with a verifiable track of their loved one's ashes, and not making false claims about your operation, which is what LifeGem has done.

LifeGem admits they don't provide any proof of the content of the LifeGem diamond as coming from the loved one.

LifeGem claimed that they own their own "LifeGem Diamond Lab" which they now admit is false.

LifeGem cannot show any verifiable proof that their claims are true.

Those are the facts. And the issues I am discussing.


You say you can name other companies doing this same service but in an accountable method......then do so. Show me a company where "personalized carbon will be handled as such, can be traced throughout the whole process and its every step will be well documented."

And for the record, I first started this investigation because I thought the idea of a personalized diamond would be very cool. I was actually looking to feature LifeGem. Imagine my dismay when I found that they were not what they claimed?

And one more issue, I never said anyone was a crook. Please don't bring that level of emotion into an otherwise civil thread. I assure you, Alexei, that when I think someone is a crook you will not have to ask for any clarification regarding my opinion.

But since you say you can name "several companies offering similar services as LifeGem" please do so.

Robert

 

[Alexei Zarakhani]

Robert,

I''m not assuming or side stepping anything. You, probably, misunderstood me. I asked those questions in a purely theoretical aspect without any regard to LifeGem. So, I will ask once again:

Could you please define “a sufficient level of accountability”. Knowing basic steps of this process – graphitization, diamond synthesis, cutting – what would you consider to be sufficient?

And on the other issue... You say you can name other companies doing this same service but in an accountable method......

No, I haven''t said that. I simply said that I could provide names of those companies. You can also do it yourself by googling “memorial diamonds”. As for their business practices and accountability, I''m absolutely clueless.

Actually, my question was also of a theoretical nature. I''ll rephrase it. Can an outsourcing model provide a sufficient level of accountability?


But since you say you can name "several companies offering similar services as LifeGem" please do so.

Here they are:

www.algordanza.com
www.ashes2gems.com
www.phoenix-diamonds.com
www.gemsmart.us
www.heart-in-diamond.co.uk

 

[YourGemologist]

Actually, my question was also of a theoretical nature. I''ll rephrase it. Can an outsourcing model provide a sufficient level of accountability?

But since you say you can name "several companies offering similar services as LifeGem" please do so.

Here they are:

www.algordanza.com
www.ashes2gems.com
www.phoenix-diamonds.com
www.gemsmart.us
www.heart-in-diamond.co.uk
Alexei
=======================================================================

Alexei,

Now you are asking the right question. The answer is: Absolutely NOT! An outsource model will never be able to offer that level of accountability that will be credible.

First, I Googled all of these companies on your list and each and every one is just a replay of LifeGem. Putting a different color lipstick on the proverbial pig. And not one offers one iota of proof that they are really pulling carbon from Grandma''s ashes. And I am not talking about CAN it be done. I am talking...can they prove they ARE doing it. The answer is a resounding: NO! Not one offered anything remotely close to an accountable system. All just reworked the LifeGem hype.

Second, even if they could provide the proof, once they hand off Grandma''s recovered carbon....they lose all accountability and control over the carbon. Therefore how can consumers be assured that it is really Grandma''s carbon in the diamond? They cannot! The carbon is no longer in their control. What is to keep the midnight shift worker of the outsourced diamond production facility from dumping that nasty old dead body carbon and just putting in some peanut butter? The answer? Nothing!

There is absolutely no proof offered by any of these companies that they are actually doing what they claim. And consumers need to be aware of this before buying into the scheme.

I guess this whole thread goes down to credibility.

When LifeGem was asked to provide documentation of their product they danced around, claimed trade secrets, and then left. Leaving a falsified claim of their diamond production capability, and a lot of unanswered questions.

When Gemesis was asked to provide documetation of their product, Clark posted up full color photographs of the facility, offered me study specimens of his product (which I will take him up on), and offered me a personal tour of his production facilities (which I will also take him up on in the near future).

Can you see the difference here?

I hope consumers can also. Its not a matter of how fancy someone''s website is. How tear jerking their sales pitch is. Or even how trustworthy they sound to the broken hearted.

Its all about prima facie evidence to prove their claims.

And not one of these "ashes to diamonds" companies has done that. And consumers need to be aware of that.

If you know of one who can provide that level of proof, Alexei, I would really like to talk to them. Because right now I have not seen a one that deserves any credibility.

Robert

 

[lisa1.01fvs1]

Robert,

Your articulated this issue so clearly!

Thank you again for clarifying and asking the tough questions.

I think we here on PS are both "forum posters" and "clients" perhaps the more leary, educated ones.

It''s a shame b/c I think this business model (with accurate and meticulous accounting for cremains to diamonds whether outsourcing or in-house production) could be so profitable.

Not to mention therapeutic for family.

Robert, have you completed your letter to Ill. Att. Gen.?

Lisa

 

[Alexei Zarakhani]

Date: 6/27/2008 6:35:30 PM
Author: YourGemologist

The answer is: Absolutely NOT! An outsource model will never be able to offer that level of accountability that will be credible.

.... even if they could provide the proof, once they hand off Grandma''s recovered carbon....they lose all accountability and control over the carbon. Therefore how can consumers be assured that it is really Grandma''s carbon in the diamond? They cannot! The carbon is no longer in their control. What is to keep the midnight shift worker of the outsourced diamond production facility from dumping that nasty old dead body carbon and just putting in some peanut butter? The answer? Nothing!

Fair enough. Outsourcing may not be a suitable model for this type of project.

Now, what about in-house operation? Can it provide “that level of accountability that will be credible”?

If you know of one who can provide that level of proof, Alexei, I would really like to talk to them. Because right now I have not seen a one that deserves any credibility.

No, I don''t. As I mentioned earlier, I don''t know much about those companies, except for what''s written on their web sites. I can''t unequivocally decide if it''s credible or not just by looking at their sites. Can you?

 

[YourGemologist]

Fair enough. Outsourcing may not be a suitable model for this type of project.

Now, what about in-house operation? Can it provide “that level of accountability that will be credible”?

I can't unequivocally decide if it's credible or not just by looking at their sites. Can you?

Alexei
====================================================================

Alexei,

Excellent questions.

An inhouse operation could provide that level of accountability. Consumers could have the opportunity to actually see the process being done if they wanted to. Just as Clark at Gemesis offered to me. There is a level of confidence when the company is willing and able to invite you in to see the process being done. Could it still be scammed? Of course. But what are the chances of someone going to the trouble to buy and maintain diamond presses for this kind of process that charges $20,000.00 for a 1.00 carat diamond, and then start scamming people? The very cost of setting up the project would be a deterent to fraud. And the very nature of an inhouse operation would establish total accountability, and liability, for the quality of the product. No way to lay the blame on others if its your total operation.

Its sort of like eating at a restaurant. If you know your waiter is taking your order, but sending it to some unknown kitchen across town to be cooked, there would be a level of concern about what exactly was happening to your food. But when the food is cooked in the same location with a kitchen that you can visit and watch your order being prepared, there is much more confidence in what you are being served.

And as far as being able to "unequivocally decide if it's credible or not just by looking at their sites?" The answer is no, I cannot.

But that is a two edged sword. If you and I cannot decide on the credibility based on their websites, then neither can consumers. And if no one can truly establish any credibility for these guys claims, I believe that some kind of government investigation is warranted, and consumers should wait to participate in their programs until an investigation is completed.

Which pretty well puts us all back where we started on this LifeGem issue. And now places LifeGem into the bag with all of these other companies making these claims.

And Lisa, I have the letter going out this week. I was so astounded to find that LifeGem was using that picture of those BARS presses as their "LifeGem Diamond Lab" that I just had to wait so we could include that in the letter.

So it will go out this week.

Robert

 

[strmrdr]

"Could you please define “a sufficient level of accountability”"

There are iso standards/certifications that would work perfectly for this.
I don't recall the exact one but I do know that they have one that when the company is certified and follows the process they can track everything in the final product down to the ppm level.
It is used both for chemicals and solids.

That in my opinion would be the first step in building a legitimate business around personalized carbon diamonds.

From such a company I would be interested in having one done from my hair for my wifey2b and one from hers for me as long as I could have them cut to my specifications.

 

[Alexei Zarakhani]

Date: 6/28/2008 4:51:14 PM
Author: YourGemologist


An inhouse operation could provide that level of accountability. Could it still be scammed? Of course. But what are the chances of someone going to the trouble to buy and maintain diamond presses for this kind of process that charges $20,000.00 for a 1.00 carat diamond, and then start scamming people? The very cost of setting up the project would be a deterent to fraud. And the very nature of an inhouse operation would establish total accountability, and liability, for the quality of the product. No way to lay the blame on others if its your total operation.

Robert, it''s a good point that if someone invests heavily in a production facility there should be a significant incent to implement fool-proof policies in order to maintain an integrity of the process. Could those policies prevent a “night shift worker issue”? Yes, but it greatly depends on a management team and policies they develop. Does an in-house operation present a guarantee from fraud? No. One should look into those policies, analyze them and inquire if they are being implemented correctly. Then chances of fraud will be minimal.

Its sort of like eating at a restaurant. If you know your waiter is taking your order, but sending it to some unknown kitchen across town to be cooked, there would be a level of concern about what exactly was happening to your food.  But when the food is cooked in the same location with a kitchen that you can visit and watch your order being prepared, there is much more confidence in what you are being served.

It''s a very good example. However, I doubt that a top-notch restaurant will invite you to to visit their kitchen ... purely due to hygene considerations and also because your visit can disrupt food preparation for other clients.
Regardless, I will argue about conclusions you are making. The reality is that majority of restaurants are lousy despite the fact that meals are prepared in-house. Why is that? Part of the problem is a lack of “know how” - they don''t know how to cook, how to serve, how to make a presentation, etc. The other part is a lack of strict policies concerning cooking, serving and presentation to maintain consistency. In the end it boils down to a reputation. It shouldn''t be a surprise for you that there are reputable catering (outsourcing) companies that serve better food and service you better than majority of local restaurants because in order to stay in business and maintain their reputation they have to outsource food from better establishments and they have to provide better service.

Now, can an outsourcing model in memorial diamonds be reputable following your “restaurant” example? Apparently, your answer was/is NO. And I''d say – YES, hypothetically it is possible. No doubt, it is more difficult and it is less probable than an “in-house” model, but still its probability is above zero. In order to do so “an integrator” should implement not only a strict set of well defined policies pertaining to the every step of the process but also be able to control implementation of those policies with third party outsourcing partners.

As for do I know any company that implemented such policies? - No, I don''t. And my answer doesn''t mean that such a company doesn''t (or won''t) exist – I simply don''t know. I simply didn''t researched/investigated those companies, their policies, practices, etc. to be able to unequivocally decide on their credibility and reputation. It''s just a pure logic exercise.

If you and I cannot decide on the credibility based on their websites, then neither can consumers.

Consumers, not me or you, have to talk to those companies, get answers, in other words, investigate and make a decision on credibility. If a consumer finally decides to opt for it, so be it – it''s a consumer''s choice. Alternatively, an independent (government?) consumer protection organization could investigate those companies and convey its findings to consumers. It is a well established practice and “memorial diamonds” are not an exception.

 

[Alexei Zarakhani]

Date: 6/29/2008 3:10:45 AM
Author: strmrdr
''Could you please define “a sufficient level of accountability”''


There are iso standards/certifications that would work perfectly for this.

I don''t recall the exact one but I do know that they have one that when the company is certified and follows the process they can track everything in the final product down to the ppm level.

It is used both for chemicals and solids.


That in my opinion would be the first step in building a legitimate business around personalized carbon diamonds.


From such a company I would be interested in having one done from my hair for my wifey2b and one from hers for me as long as I could have them cut to my specifications.

I totally agree. That is a set of policies I was talking about. No doubt, an ISO certification should be a solid step towards accountability and credibility. However, a "memorial diamond" company have to develop(tailor) and implement those policies and be in operation for certain period of time before achieving this status.
BTW, ISO certification is applicable not only to manufacturing of products but also to services, software, etc.

 

[YourGemologist]

Consumers, not me or you, have to talk to those companies, get answers, in other words, investigate and make a decision on credibility. If a consumer finally decides to opt for it, so be it – it's a consumer's choice. Alternatively, an independent (government?) consumer protection organization could investigate those companies and convey its findings to consumers. It is a well established practice and “memorial diamonds” are not an exception.

Alexei

AOTC /
D.Nea Diamonds
==================================================================

Alexei,

You had me until this statement. I could not disagree more.

Are you actually saying that it is up to consumers to know to ask the right technical questions about diamond synthesis and understand the technical answers?

That is just absurd! Only a handful of professionals in this industry even know the right questions to ask, much less how to interpret the answers!


And a government investigation of LifeGem and the entire "memorial diamond" industry is exactly what I am advocating and actiing to bring about.



Alexei, unless you have some proof to offer, some hard copy evidence to provide, I regret that this back and forth is not going to provide any consumer with any help.

If you or anyone you know has any actual proof that this "memorial diamond" business has anything to offer but empty promises, I am totally open to them. But so far.......

We have proof that LifeGem lied, and has refused to provide any answers.

Those are facts. And the only facts on the table at this point.

My opinion, your opinion, mean nothing. The facts speak for themselves. Res Ipsa Loquitur.


If anyone has any more real proof to offer.............................please....

Robert

 

[sparxs111]

I still say get the media involved and start with the media stations that actually covered memorial diamonds, but were scammed. They have an ethical right to the public to report scams as well as scams that they promote. I think it would be much easier to start that way than to go to the government asking for investigations. Media would also get it out to the everyday consumer when a government investigation report or answer wouldn''t be as wide spread. MEDIA MEDIA MEDIA.

 

[Alexei Zarakhani]

Date: 6/30/2008 11:37:02 PM
Author: YourGemologist


Are you actually saying that it is up to consumers to know to ask the right technical questions about diamond synthesis and understand the technical answers?

Hi Robert,

I actually meant that it''s up to consumers to decide weather to go for it or not. There are several options that shall be taken before that. First, they can research those memorial diamond companies, their standards, policies, etc. Believe me, it''s not a technical questions that are critical. It''s rather an organization of process flow, implemented policies to prevent mixing one personalized stone/graphite/etc. with another, supporting documentation for every step and so forth.
Another option will be – somebody else should do this work for them. Some consumer advisory bureau, for example, which publishes its findings (for free or for a fee). It''s a widely adopted practice for virtually aspect of consumer demand - be it food, medicine, electronics, cars, restaurants, hotels, etc.

So, what I was actually saying is - it''s up to consumer to reach that certain level of credibility towards a memorial diamond phenomena, in general, and to a certain provider of such services, in particular. If this level of credibility will be sufficient to decide to go ahead – fine, if not – also fine. Besides, those threshold levels will differ from one customer to another – one size, apparently, doesn''t fit all.

That is just absurd! Only a handful of professionals in this industry even know the right questions to ask, much less how to interpret the answers!

I wish food, cars, electronics, jewelry and many other nice things were sold that way.

And a government investigation of LifeGem and the entire "memorial diamond" industry is exactly what I am advocating and actiing to bring about.

I would opt for commercial customer advisory agencies rather than for some government bodies. Any government investigation (if it agrees to do so, in a first place) will eventually be dragged into a legal wrestling with no conclusive verdict in sight.

If you or anyone you know has any actual proof that this "memorial diamond" business has anything to offer but empty promises, I am totally open to them. But so far.......

As I said earlier, I don''t have any proof that any (or particular) existing “memorial diamond” business is sound. Likewise, I don''t have any proof that it''s only empty promises. I''m here to provide a technical expertise and from that perspective "memorial diamonds" are not empty promises.

 

[Suzie Gem]

Hello
I''m really not familiar with threads and forums as such, I''m too old to know much about computers.
But, I have read with great interest a huge thread (I think you call it) debate about ''Cremation Diamonds''.
I came across an article written in the UK Daily Telegraph about "phoenix-diamonds.com" who have made the first real diamond in the world grown? from an umbilical cord of a a baby.
Their website also has a blog (what the hell''s that!!!) which shows diamonds made from ashes of a dog.
That''s the best I can contribute.
Love the real rocks.

 

[geckodani]

Wow. Fascinating read and something I will definitely recommend to anyone I know thinking about this process! Thankyou PS for letting this discussion happen.

 

[pg93]

Yes, thank you for looking into this and bringing these discrepencies to public light! What is the current status concerning questionable practices of this company?