There is some evidence that individuals can gain voluntary control over their sexual arousal patterns through behavioral conditioning, such that someone who is attracted to “underage” persons could learn to suppress their sexual arousal to the underage category. There is a lack of credible research showing that one can easily change the underlying sexual attraction, e.g., gay to straight, straight to gay, exclusive pedophile to teleiophile (attraction to adults).

Pedophilia contains a set of urges and cravings toward viewing or touching children.

I don’t think we know enough yet to draw any conclusion about men who are nonexclusive in their attractions, e.g., could we shift a bisexual man to respond more to male vs. female stimuli, could we shift a nonexclusive pedophile to respond less to prepubescent children and more to adults? And we know very little about sexual attraction to prepubescent or pubescent children in women.

As an aside, I would note that Non-offending heterosexual men from the community show some sexual response to depictions of pubescent girls — more than to prepubescent girls or males –, but this is much lower than their sexual arousal to older adolescents or adult women. More importantly, many 14 or 15-year-old girls would not be
pubescent, i.e., in Tanner stages 2 or 3 of development; many would instead be in Tanner Stage 4, and a few might appear to be in Tanner Stage 5. For illustrations and brief descriptions of what these stages mean, see:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanner_scale

I suspect a lot of the heat (and lack of light) in the recent debates about hebephilia arose from confusion about pubescence cues, chronological age, and normative male sexual response patterns.