The article focuses on flaws in the actual approaches of exposure to a chemical of recipient organisms. It demonstrates the excessive use of arguments based on adverse effects and underlines the necessity to take adaptive effects seriously. Regulators are invited to rethink their inclination to the 'When in doubt, keep it out.' precautionary approach, with results in counter-productive and costly regulations. The authors are clear about the necessity to include hormesis, in the form of a toxicological insignificant exposure (TIE) level, related to the concentration, as a regulatory translation of adaptive effects. This inclusion might well be the 'brake' for the looming 'collision' with reality of the actual linear toxicological models. This analysis includes the advice to EPA, not to follow the 'witch hunt of synthetic chemicals' as embodied in the EU REACH program.