The controversy thing seems to be working out for me, so I’m going to try another hot-button issue.

There is something peculiar about our family. Okay, there are many peculiar things about our family, but I’m going to focus on this: not one of the three of us is overweight, or even close to it.

Why is this peculiar?

* We eat whatever we want with almost no regard to healthy-eating recommendations. We do eat a lot of vegetables, because we like them, but also plenty of red meat, butter, cheese, eggs, and sweets.
* Obesity runs in both of our families.
* We don’t follow any kind of exercise program.
* Our income is below the Seattle median. (Higher income is associated with less chance of obesity, though the association is growing weaker over time.)

There are also several factors working in our favor:

* Age. Laurie and I are in our early thirties. Iris is in her early single-digits. Younger people are much less likely to be overweight or obese than people over, say, 50.
* Education. We’re both reasonably highly educated, and this has a strong negative correlation with obesity. A person with a college degree is about half as likely to be obese as one who didn’t finish high school.
* Race. We’re white, which gives us an unfair advantage in this as in basically everything else.
* Factor X, which I will describe below.

Incidentally, the [American Obesity Association](http://www.obesity.org/) is a fount of statistics on this issue.

Here’s the question I’d like to answer: if you could do just one thing to improve your own and your children’s chances of maintaining a healthy weight, what is your best bet?

It’s not dieting. The failure rate of weight-reduction diets is so appalling (in the realm of 95 percent over five years) that they should probably be considered in the category of things you would have to be crazy to think you can succeed at, like winning at roulette or changing your sexual orientation.

Starting an exercise program is a better call. Here’s a 2003 study done at Duke. It randomly assigned subjects to three different exercise programs (light, moderate, and intense) for a nine-month trial. Six months after the trial, a majority of the subjects–none of whom were exercising regularly before the experiment–were still exercising, with those in the light and moderate groups most likely (about 70 percent) to continue. Furthermore, participants who had been in the light group were now exercising at an intensity more like the moderate group.

The study didn’t look at weight loss, but you can’t exercise at these levels without either losing weight or swapping body fat for muscle, which is just as good. I’m curious to know how many of the study participants are still exercising today, three years later, and whether they’ve lost weight. And, of course, outside of long-term studies like this, the majority of people who start exercise programs don’t stick with them very long. The abandonment rate is hard to measure definitively but is definitely better than the rate for dieting, probably because exercise makes you feel good in a way dieting doesn’t.

Which brings us to Factor X: the type of neighborhood you live in.

See, I sort of lied when I said that we don’t have a regular exercise program. In fact, I think we get more exercise than most Americans. That’s because we don’t own a car and run most of our errands on foot. The difference between this and a gym membership is that unless we move, we can’t opt out of this exercise. Even if we bought a car, the arrangement of our neighborhood would make it extremely inconvenient to use it for our typical errands.

Last year, Laurie brought home a free pedometer she’d been given at work. Naturally, since this was a new gadget coming into the house, I immediately confiscated it for my own use. A bit of Googling indicated that 5000 steps per day or less was defined as “sedentary,” and over 10,000 steps per day “active.” So I got up the next morning and clipped on the pedometer.

It was a pretty typical day. I went for a walk with Iris on Broadway. In the afternoon we all went down to the late Red Line for some steamed milk and cookies. (The cookies weren’t steamed.) At the end of the day I looked at the pedometer. I’d racked up over 16,000 steps. I have no idea where the pedometer is now, but I’d bet I’ve made close to 5000 steps already today, just on the way to this cafe.

This sounds like a just-so story, the kind of pure anecdote that would tend to make me want to throw the newspaper across the room if I didn’t read the newspaper online. Does your neighborhood style actually have any meaningful correlation with your weight?

It does. Larry Frank, a professor at the University of British Columbia, has conducted multiple studies on the topic. Here’s one he did in Atlanta which found that “people who live in neighborhoods with a mix of shops and businesses within easy walking distance are 7 percent less likely to be obese, lowering their relative risk of obesity by 35 percent.” Frank has also studied my own county, King County, WA, and found smaller but still significant correlations. The studies controlled for education, age, income, race, and sex.

This is not experimental data. It’s quite possible that there is some other confounding variable causing the correlation, something Frank didn’t think of. But I, for one, plan to continue eating like a food writer, so we’re not moving.

Last month I got excited about corn-flavored Pretz, the crunchy Japanese pretzel sticks.

Yesterday Iris and I went to Uwajimaya. While we shopped I entertained her by pretending to be the huge dragon hanging from the ceiling and saying things like, “Mmm…I smell roast duck!” Later in the car Iris said she was the dragon, and she said, “This dragon LOVES POCKY STICKS.”

We did get some Pocky sticks (Almond Crush flavor), but I was more excited about something else: Cacao Pretz.

Aside from the fact that Cacao Pretz are a tasty snack (even though they taste very little like chocolate), I was excited about them in a purely philosophical sense. They represent the fulcrum of the Pocky/Pretz lever. The crux of the matter. It is as if a regular chocolate Pocky, enamored of its Pretzy cousin, managed to absorb its chocolate skin.

Try them. Ours are gone.

There is a real danger in reporting on consumer issues: angry corporate goons with torches. Wait, that’s not it. The danger is that you will tear into some topic so trifling that the only way you’re likely to help the consumer is by giving him a good laugh at how much of a dick you are.

Welcome to today’s post about credit card minimums!

The other day I wanted a Vietnamese sandwich. I went into the sandwich place and requested the grilled pork. I handed over my Mastercard, and the cashier gestured at a sign on the counter: $10 minimum for credit cards. I could have walked to the ATM, but I was on my way to pick up Iris. No sandwich for me.

How much would the sandwich place have paid their bank for accepting my card? Somewhere in the 22 to 29 cent range. Each swipe of a credit card incurs a flat fee–usually 20 or 25 cents–and a percentage charge (known, Orwellianly, as the “discount rate”) of 1 to 3 percent. The merchant also pays a monthly or yearly flat fee and may be paying for the terminal rental as well.

Now, I admit it: 29 cents on a $2.50 sandwich is a big chomp–maybe enough to zero out the profit margin on the sandwich. That’s one way to think about it. Another way is: how much more profit will the restaurant make by accepting credit cards rather than accepting cash only? Judging by the proportion of businesses in my neighborhood that accept cards (nearly all of them), this is a pretty good tradeoff.

That’s why I ratted out the sandwich place, by going to the Mastercard site and filling out the Merchant/Retailer Violation form. You see, Visa and Mastercard don’t allow merchants to set a minimum charge. If you have a Visa card, Visa prefers that you call, wait on hold, and answer a whole bunch of questions. Fun. The number is (800) 847-2911, but I’d recommend just filling out the Mastercard form, which doesn’t ask for your Mastercard number.

I did ask the Visa rep what would happen when I made a complaint, and he said they would start by sending a letter reminding the business that minimum charges are verboten, and if there were further complaints, it could escalate as far as having their contract yanked. It seems unlikely to me that it would actually get to that point. Also, the Visa guy didn’t actually use the word “verboten.”

It’s obvious that small businesses are getting squeezed by the banks–accepting credit cards is a fact of life, and the banks that handle their merchant accounts would like to get as much money out of the deal as possible. They’re also getting squeezed by cranky customers like me, who want low prices and the ultimate in convenience. No wonder businesses try to weasel out of the rules–although doing it in a way that annoys customers seems counterproductive.

Does credit card processing have to be a one-size-fits-all approach? Most coffeehouse sales are in the $2-$5 range. Does a business like that have to get the same processing rates as, say, a furniture store?

So I made a couple of phone calls, and the answer is “sort of.”

I called Washington Mutual, a popular local bank, and posed as a coffee shop proprietor. WAMU does offer a package with no per-transaction authorization fee. Unfortunately, the discount rate is 12.71 percent, which is 31 cents per sandwich. I don’t see this making anyone happy.

One of my favorite coffeehouses, [Cafe Dharwin](http://www.cafedharwin.com/), has no minimum charge and no surcharge. I emailed owner Dharmi Siddaiah and asked how he manages this. He said:

> I do pay a fee per transaction and it’s kind of on the lower end of
most companies.

> It is a bit difficult for a small business like us since our
average ticket price are lower than restaurants, but I decided to eat
that extra expense.

Awesome. Cafe Dharwin is at 10th Ave E and Miller.

You can’t talk about minimum charges without mentioning surcharges. Many coffee places with no minimum charge do levy a surcharge on credit card transactions below a certain amount–say, an extra 35 cents on transactions under $5. This is also against the rules, but I don’t get all bothered about it, because it’s only 35 cents and they’re not actually turning me away. It’s totally kosher to offer a 35-cent “cash discount,” anyway, so what’s the difference?

Here is my recommended policy, as your caped consumer crusader.

* When you encounter a minimum charge, ask to speak to a manager about it and explain that their practice violates their merchant services agreement–or, back in the real world, (a) call them later, or (b) just rat them out to Visa or Mastercard as described above. You’re not going to get anyone in serious trouble unless they’re flagrant repeat offenders.

* When using your credit card to pay a small bill, tip generously (by cash or credit)–at least $1 for anything under $5, enough to cover the transaction fee and then some.

Now, does anyone else have a burning consumer issue? Because you should get that looked at.

I’ve always had a prejudice against prime rib, and not just the bad hotel buffet version. When the December issue of Fine Cooking landed on my doorstep last week with a juicy slice of roast beef on the cover, I finally figured out what my objection is.

Prime rib is the opposite of steak. A steak is nicely seared on the top and bottom surfaces and not cooked on the edge. A slice of rib roast is seared on the edges and not cooked on the top or bottom. I’m not saying the sear is the only part of the steak worth eating, but it’s certainly a key part of the allure. Why go with a cooking method that minimizes it?

Oh, I understand the appeal of the large roast that everyone shares. But are you sure your guests wouldn’t prefer a rib-eye steak?

Luckily, there’s a special cookie centerfold in this issue, so it’s okay.

I’m sitting at Top Pot, the coffeeshop/doughnut shoppe, Capitol Hill location. Top Pot’s decor can be summed up in one word: books. I’m sitting next to a book called _The Works of Bacon_.

It’s not a cookbook. How lame.