Mr. Pink, what makes you think that 'Asians' eat spicier food than 'westerners'? Perhaps a few definitions of who is 'Asian' and who is a 'westerner' might help.
PS I'm pretty much what you'd probably label as a 'westerner'; a big fan of western onions, garlic; a lot of my American friends are into Mexican food; Shanghai, Cantonese and Japanese food is pretty non-spicey; Indian food is very varied, north-south, east-west, more into numerous herbs all lumped together in much of 'western' language and culture as 'curry' than into hot spices; Afghans can't take spicey food, nor can Iranis; dental care is pretty good in Singapore, I think; meat-eaters (e.g., Mongols) all over geography and history have better teeth than those whose bottom line is cereal grains (wheat, rice, etc.)
Now: maybe tooth-brushing might be practiced more in many places, and cigarette smoking in feewer ones, but you are way oversensitive. And if you eat cheese and drink milk, as I do, then it's probably noticeable to others who don't do so.
Chill out, man, I don't know where your home is but you're not there, and you can't go home again.

This is not fake news, it's humor. Some people may not get it.

@cloudtrapezer: Agree with you so far, but you & I know that the position/wealth/power of the publisher has a lot to do with what gets taken in by readers - all laid out by Chomsky very clearly 30 years ago. 'America' is free as hell in terms of possibilities for digging up info, but you may have to work as hard as Chomsky does to take full advantage of it. Then, in the US, back in the day, there was I. F. Stone's Weekly, a great boon to people willing to dig for stories - Stone published it out of his apartment, something like maybe 2000 a week? and maybe a third of those were read by people in the federal government. Great noble effort, but...
To be clear: yes, I'm opposed to censorship, but like I think I've said, there are different ways to skin a cat...brainwash him, maybe...

Yeah - neither the man nor the media for which he has such contempt are helping much.

@cloutrapezer: Won't dispute with you about the fate of the anti-Corbyn campaign, but other such campaigns do have effect. In fact the bogus campaign against fake news is itself often a form of fake news (which, in the US, seems to be considered mostly 'liberal' (in the conservative American sense of the word - you know, NYT, Washington Post etc.)).

As for many sources of information, that's overall good, but too many choices just confuse people who are not used to thinking them out and judging them - many have been too well-trained early in life and can't handle it.
In short, manipulation of opinion, backed by wealth/power still works all too well, and I think this is largely due to the fact that the same power/wealth that manipulates minds is the nexus for the general sense of powerlessness that so many feel, so they don't see much use in thinking things through with any care and instead, perhaps angrily, just go out and, well, maybe vote Trump.

It's a chicken or egg, Catch 22, asshole kind of thing.