Re: I'm suddenly feeling gay-ish. ;p

http://medicalxpress.com/news/2012-07-exposure-sexual-content-popular-movies.html

Analyzes sensation-seekers without demonstrating causation or how sensation-seekers are different from their non-seeking peers. Yes, someone who already has an interest will find it in RL or media, but did gay-Pronz make you gay? It did nothing for me.

It doesn't just analyse sensation-seeking -

"One of the great dangers of adolescence, is the predisposition for "sensation seeking" behavior. Between the ages of ten and fifteen, the tendency to seek more novel and intense stimulation of all kinds peaks. The wild hormonal surges of adolescence makes judicious thinking a bit more difficult. ... But sensation seeking did not entirely explain these effects; the researchers also speculate that adolescents learn specific behaviors from the sexual messages in movies. Many adolescents turn to movies to acquire "sexual scripts" that offer examples of how to behave when confronted with complicated emotional situations."

http://phys.org/news/2011-03-experiencing-violence-aggression-children.html

Real violence. Not even pretend ( although some researchers are very unable to distinguish between the two. ) But you previously argued that Pronz is substitution for those who don't/can't get any. We can't then argue that they are having sex or are under imminent "threat" of getting laid.

And again, if they were already sexually active at time of media exposure, then you have no causation.

It is more about how things do affect us profoundly during childhood and I think there is evidence (although I couldn't find it readily) that the depiction of violence in cinema and other areas has a similar affect - as does playing violent video games.

http://medicalxpress.com/news/2011-08-clinical-young-brains-lack-wisdom.html

"Funny enough, the young brain is more reactive to negative reinforcement than the older one."

So now they're more aversive than seeking? It would then seem that seeing sex they initially find disquieting should put them off it for life? Maybe not. But that's what they seem to be arguing.

I think it does point to the fact that over time we learn to discriminate what is important or relevant and what is not.

http://medicalxpress.com/news/2012-02-brain-deceptive-advertising.html

Do you even read these links? Usually.

"As a result, participants more frequently believed moderately deceptive advertising."

I seem to recall you saying that advertising had no appreciable affects. I'll try to be more observant of any links that pass my way in future as I'm not going to search out such info. As I've commented, I doubt the industry would spend so much if they didn't see appreciable returns.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-16854593

DO you read these links? Yep.

Lead researcher Dr Karen Ersche said: "It has long been known that not everyone who takes drugs becomes addicted."

Yes, the minds of addicts are different from the minds of others. So, "Pronz is a gateway drug" just won't be true for the majority. And even though only some are alcoholics, the notion that alcoholism is inevitable in most led the hysteria which brought us Prohibition and all the horrific fallout thereof.

It does seem as if some people are more prone to addictions (of all sorts) than others. Do they know this?

These were just a few of the links I found but I will be looking for others.