Tritium in Signs

[xat@inel.gov (Al Tschaeche)]

Some unidentified person  wrote on RADSAFE on 3/27/96 a message on the
subject: "H-3 Exit Signs."  I quote from the message as follows:
"Admittedly, the broken sign in the university library isn't likely to
result in uptakes like these (3 mSv), but finite risk is nonetheless
associated with these types of devices.  The decision of whether or not to
install tritium-powered exit signs should be taken only after weighing this
risk against the benefit ... ."
 (OPINION)  (Before I go on, I do not intend this to be an ad hominem attack
on the person who penned those words.  I only intend to use the words as
another example of how we "do it to ourselves.")  
I scream.  I shudder.  I cry.  I am appalled. Yet another example of  an
apparent factual statement that "finite risk is nonetheless associated with
these types of devices" that could be interpreted as saying: "yes, there is
a real, known risk," when we don't know that there is any risk at all at 3 mSv.
If the word "associated" is intended to convey great uncertainty about the
risk and that there may be no risk at all, I don't believe a member of the
public would look at it that way.  (OPINION)
I trust that the words were meant to convey the idea that 3 mSv is
hypothesized by some to carry a risk, but the hypothesis has never been
demonstrated at low doses, therefore, there may be no risk at all at such
doses.  If so, the word "associated" doesn't do it for me.  (OPINION)