>>22132508
The artisanal culinary techniques employed by Japanese chefs are very technical and advanced. On a scientific level, they successfully latticr the sodium molecules with long-chain organic glycerides and lipids which means that when the body absorbs them they do not form the problematic free radicals which other sodium salts do. This is only possible due to the specific protein-glutamate structures and fatty acids found in Japanese cooking. Compared to other culinary traditions, Japanese Ryōri stands well above them.

>>22132508
By getting stomach cancer.

Overall their diet is better and they're healthier than the average western country but it's been known for a long time that their very high salt intake contributes to issues and they keep trying to bring intake down.

File: city colors.webm (2.92 MB, 1920x1080)

2.92 MB WEBM

>>22132737
s-suge...

Real answer: we don't eat as much sodium as you think we do. We don't snack as much as anglos and when we do, it's not always packaged crisps and crackers like it is in Canzuk Australia and America.
Couple that with a high veg diet, which famously counteracts sodium's ability to fuck with blood pressure through the potassium found naturally in fruit and veg, and there you fucking have it.
>>22132744
lmao
An increase of 68% risk sounds scary in a headline… until you understand that the base risk is just 0.6% so the risk of stomach cancer is 1% in people eating high sodium diets. It's a nothingburger of a concern.
An American actually has a much much much much much much much much much higher risk of being present during a mass shooting (7% chance) than of getting stomach cancer, high sodium diet or not.

>>22132737
Thanks Google.

File: 1625735509595.jpg (32 KB, 792x410)

32 KB JPG

>>22132737

>>22132808
>An increase of 68% risk sounds scary in a headline… until you understand that the base risk is just 0.6% so the risk of stomach cancer is 1% in people eating high sodium diets.
Yeah for the individual it's a small increase in risk, but it's still likely to lead to at least thousands of more cancer cases that could've been avoided which is significant.

>dude mass shootings lmao
Needlessly inflammatory and irrelevant.

>>22132508
Most of Asia is just Russia. Russians don't live that long.

Asian people who live long are from Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea, Japan, Macao, Emirates, Israel or Qatar. They spend money on doctors, not food.

>>22132818
>irrelevant
How? It exemplifies the extreme rarity of stomach cancer. I live in America. Not I nor anyone I know has been in a mass shooting. And if it's more likely that I'm going to be shot shopping for beef jerky at Costco than I am to ever get stomach cancer and I'm not concerned about getting shot, why the shit should I be concerned about stomach cancer? Again: it's a nothingburger
>thousands of more cancer cases
Not how risk works.

>>22132891
You can talk about the rarity of it just with the numbers alone. I think you're also twisting the numbers a bit because it seems unlikely that 24 million people have been involved in mass shootings. There are probably some demographics that face a higher risk of experiencing shootings where multiple people get shot but I don't think that's the same thing as claiming you have a 7% chance of being present when someone randomly shoots up a grocery store.

>increased risk doesn't result in more cases
Yes, that's actually how it works.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12502230/
>In 2021, 7.93% of global gastric cancer deaths...were linked to high sodium intake

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10167900/
>gastric cancer (GC) remains responsible for 1.089 million new cancer cases and 0.769 million deaths in 2020 worldwide

That means about 60,000 stomach cancer deaths are linked to high sodium intake. And that's just deaths, the number of people who get it and have to go through treatment or die from something else is still much higher. It's a large burden affecting a lot of people.

I already said for the individual the risk is low. You don't have to act like having a salty snack one day means you're dead from stomach cancer the next day. But you can just say the risk doesn't bother you without having to deny the impact it has overall.

>>22132508
salt is not bad for you. neither is a lot of salt.

>>22132985
>trust me bro
you need some salt, maybe even more than some people want to currently recommend, but you can still have too much and get sick from it

>>22132942
Wow. You really don't understand statistics at all, huh?
10% of the population is gay.
I'm not gay and I'm talking to you. Does that mean there's a 20% chance that you are? No, of course not. Because that's not how statistics and risk work.

>>22133023
I don't know what you're talking about. There are links right there telling you how many cases of stomach cancer are linked to high salt intake. It just seems like you're floundering instead of addressing the point.

>>22133035
>I don't know what you're talking about
Exactly.

>>22133023
Youre both gay
Riddle solved

>>22132508
rice is very low sodium, so high sodium sauces are mostly acting to counteract that
i guess it gets out of hand for some people

>>22133041
But that would be 200% of the population being gay! That means you are double gay!

>>22133036
You're not saying anything, just hoping for a gotcha because you can't refute the numbers. It's sad, really.