My point is/was it does effect behavior quite negatively. All mainstream will say is technical data, they will not admit it lowers brainwave activity, and yes, it does.
The offending cartoon came out in 1997, and the TV standard has been around since 1950s, you would think someone would/should have known better
The chart I posted could use some better explaining...\
There are 2 frequencies at work here, the one your eye works at, and the one your brain works at. When your eye sees something, it fires off a message to your brain to process it. If it fires too quickly, it will most likely be ignored. Sometimes though, it will rise up to a threshold where the brain knows something happened, but cannot react quick enough to know what.
TV is a repeated traced dot 60 times per second, it doesn't matter how you slice the numbers, THE DOT REPEATS 60X/SECOND. Every 40X/second(maybe), your brain processes flickering the eye sees. Anything faster appears to be continuous, slower is flickering. If you point a videocam at a tv picture, you see the blackbars scrolling up and down the screen, because by the time the camera "sees" the same dot being drawn, it has already gone back up, down again, and a little past where it was the first time, so what the camera "sees" are bars moving down.
A technical term we need to throw in to make better sense of what happened. The dot on the tv moves from top to bottom every 60th of a second, the camera sampled it when it moved down, so it appears to be moving down. If the tv and camera could agree exactly when the top and bottom was, it would be a stationary bar. Same type of thing happens when you look at a brick wall through a screen, those weird bendy lines that don't really exist, but when you move your head, they move too.
Your brain can't make sense of what the eyes see faster than a certain point, but it will respond. In a quite unexpected way. Just like the camera thought the bars were going down on the screen, the brain thinks the flicker is at a rate your brain synthesizes from its own speed and what the eye is sending. The graph shows those two signals, and the red line is what gets interpreted. The red curve is quite slow compared to the originals though, and in this case it's around 1/30th, or 2 times per second. I'm not saying this is math exactly what happens, but the closer those two inputs(eye and comprehend), the lower output will be. At a rate of 4 times per second, it is at a sleep state I believe.
Or try listening to two near tones, they seem to "hum" at a some point, that is a beat frequency.
I can try to make an example of the effect, but I imagine it would grate on your eyeballs terrible. I would also need to know the refresh rate of whatever you are viewing it on, so it gets all involved.
Lets just say anything too fast to be properly comprehended will turn into a much slower signal. In the same way the camera saw a bar moving down, your eye does indeed see the dot being traced, but the brain can't and copes by thinking "sleep".