I find it very surprising that balut made him vomit, it pretty much tastes like a standard chicken/duck non-fertilized egg with a different texture. Not that I necessarily enjoyed it, but with salt, its not terrible. Hakarl is bad, but I barely think that counts, in the sense that I don't think it was EVER meant to taste pleasing. I find any foods containing extremely high levels of ammonia to be generally off putting, but maybe in the future that flavor profile will be like hops in beer today and hipsters will chase after it and put it in everything. /shrug.

Also from another angle, if the point of the museum is to remove the "otherization" aspect from food, why even call it the "disgusting food"? Obviously anyone who connotates the exhibit with the items inside will be going in with a specific bias.

My personal thoughts are that a majority of "disgusting" items are generally grouped into categories broadly being: fermented, processed (sausages/spam), organ meat, or "creatively made" (ortolan, casu marzu). Just call it a food museum and subdivide it by the above categories, and remove the dumb culture differentiation.

The very article that they reference with Anthony Bourdain has a part that criticizes the notion of overly closely tying a food to a specific nation/culture. If you want to get rid of these sorts of biases, don't even bother tying the item to an identity, just show it and make it "normal" seeming.