That is not how science works

Let's be very clear from the beginning, our stomach is an acidic environment (a pH of about 1.5 - 3). Food enters the stomach and is immediately combined with hydrochloric acid (HCL) before it enters the digestive tract.  Very bad for the body IF there wasn't a naturally occurring means for the body to reduce/eliminate that acidity. Lo and behold, guess what the pancreas does, it secretes a slurry to cancels out the acid the stomach has just introduced into the rest of the body. So, regardless of the food you have just eaten, it will be combined with a highly acid substance and then subsequently a highly alkaline substance.

Kimchi pH,,, 4.2.

This isn't rocket science, but basic bio-chemistry of the human body.  So to make unqualified statements such as this is irresponsible.  It is also a bit ironic!

In this first grab, Jillian offers as support a screen grab of a Google search result.

Notice it states "could be linked"

The article from the LA Times states,

“We are proud that we can use scientific methods to confirm the health benefits of our traditional food,” said Park Kun-young, who heads the institute.

Kimchi specialists abound here. The library of a kimchi museum in Seoul holds more than 2,000 books about kimchi and thousands more dissertations. (“A Kinetic Model for Lactic Acid Production in Kimchi” was among the recent titles.) New theses are being added at the rate of 300 per year.

But as the article notes, and Jillian highlights,

Among the papers not to be found in the vast library of the kimchi museum is one published in June 2005 in the Beijing-based World Journal of Gastroenterology titled “Kimchi and Soybean Pastes Are Risk Factors of Gastric Cancer.” [ABSTRACT with links to the full paper]

The researchers, all South Korean, report that kimchi and other spicy and fermented foods could be linked to the most common cancer among Koreans. Rates of gastric cancer among Koreans and Japanese are 10 times higher than in the United States.

So besides vaguely citing a 15 year old paper, lets have a look-see. From the abstract,

This case-control study investigated the effects of kimchi, soybean paste, fresh vegetables, nonfermented alliums, nonfermented seafood, nonfermented soybean foods, and the genetic polymorphisms of some metabolic enzymes on the risk of gastric cancer in Koreans.

So right from the start there is a concern.  If you remember my post from yesterday, I noted an article by LOS concerning the hierarchy of evidence.  In said article, it is noted, 

Case-control studies (strength = moderate)
Case-control studies are also observational, and they work somewhat backwards from how we typically think of experiments. They start with the outcome, then try to figure out what caused it. Typically, this is done by having two groups: a group with the outcome of interest, and a group without the outcome of interest (i.e., the control group). Then, they look at the frequency of some potential cause within each group,,, like cross sectional studies, this design also struggles to disentangle cause and effect. In certain circumstances, however, it does have the potential to show cause and effect if it can be established that the predictor variable occurred before the outcome, and if all confounders were accounted for. As a general rule, however, at least one of those conditions is not met and this type of study is prone to biases (for example, people who suffer heart disease are more likely to remember something like taking X than people who don’t suffer heart disease). As a result, it is generally not possible to draw causal conclusions from case-controlled studies. Probably the biggest advantage of this type of study, however, is the fact that it can deal with rare outcomes.

 A second point of concern, (from the abstract)

RESULTS:

A decreased risk of gastric cancer was noted among people with high consumption of nonfermented alliums and nonfermented seafood. On the other hand, consumption of kimchi, and soybean pastes was associated with increased risk of gastric cancer.

IOWs, had Jillian been a better "Google Scientist," she would not have emphatically stated, "Rates of gastric cancer in Korea because of kimchi is not because of the cabbage it's because of the probiotic lactic acid paired with the spices in the hot peppers in the kimchi that was like acid on a stomach and then the cancer viruses took over,,,"  She believes her overly salted cabbage sludge is different from all other ferments and the perfect probiotic.  All other fermented probiotic drinks are faulty.

No where in the paper is that even implied, it comes from her cockamamie idea that the different sugars in various other ferments (referring to kombucha, ACV, kefir etc). and lactic acid is basically like drinking pure acid. From a September 2, 2019 post.

But back to the Times article and a point , actually two points. Jillian ignores as they do not support a word she says.

1] “We found that if you were a very, very heavy eater of kimchi, you had a 50% higher risk of getting stomach cancer,” said Kim Heon of the department of preventive medicine at Chungbuk National University and one of the authors. “It is not that kimchi is not a healthy food -- it is a healthy food, but in excessive quantities there are risk factors.”

2] Other studies have suggested that the heavy concentration of salt in some kimchi and the fish sauce used for flavoring could be problematic, but they too have received comparatively little attention.

Contrary to her belief, one does not get to take science, tear it up and ignore pertinent information.  One can not cherry-pick information and make up your own science as you go along.  Science does not work that way.

So once again, Jillian is playing by her own rules.  Literally making up the science as she goes.  Lactic acid is lactic acid. A byproduct of metabolism, whether microbial or muscle exertion.  You do not get to pick bits and pieces out of various packets of information, ignoring the whole. of the conclusion. Science is not a mix and match jigsaw puzzle.  It is a definitive process of observation and experimentation with repeatable results.