Required Listening: The Science Podcasts That Shaped How I Think
Podcasts provide some of the best free science education available. Here's my list of show recommendations to get you started. By: JUNC Founder Noah Allen
I love a good podcast. But my taste depends on what I’m doing. While on a long run, for example, I’ll listen to a 2+ hour commentary and recap of a movie I’ve never seen. When processing samples or labeling tubes in the lab, I want improv comedy. But most of the time, I really enjoy digging into science podcasts. Listening to critical, insightful commentary stimulates the core scientist in me. Throw in some production design along with a story and I’m hooked. In the arena of science communication, podcasts must be doing the most right now. I mean famous Boeing engineer turned science educator Bill Nye did 151 episodes of his podcast Science Rules! By comparison, his TV show only ran 100 episodes.
So today I’m covering the spectrum of science education podcasts, recapping the best shows that have changed my life, health, and scientific career. I’ll talk about what makes each one special and include example episodes that make good entry points into each show.
StarTalk Radio
A crucial podcast in learning to think like a scientist is StarTalk Radio with Neil deGrasse Tyson. By taking questions from listeners and interviewing expert guests, Tyson grounds each conversation in basic physics with expert analogy. His approach makes even the most extreme cosmic theories understandable and relatable. StarTalk builds the scientific identity of their listeners by engaging and giving direct explanations. This is on display when Tyson and his co-host take listener questions. Tyson considers every question as if you were a student in the front row of a graduate-level astrophysics course. He is exacting, to the point, but expansive at the same time, as if your question was only the jumping-off point. Questions based on incorrect assumptions are dealt with first by correcting the assumption, rebuilding a better question, and addressing the core curiosity.
We can’t leave out the show’s co-host, full-time comedian Chuck Nice. Over several years of listening to Nice, I’ve heard his shift from comedic relief to a trained scientific mind. From time to time, he will confidently take over to explain concepts on behalf of Tyson. But Nice still slides in his jokes, with timing and content that causes Tyson to break up laughing nearly every episode. StarTalk Radio has over 1,100 episodes and is still released weekly. Following the Sirius XM takeover of several podcast studios, you can now hear the show first over satellite radio. Fitting for a show with a cosmic perspective.
Planet Money
Next, NPR’s weekly economics show, Planet Money, with in-depth reporting on economic factors shaping the U.S. and world economies. Somehow the show feels like the production of a small, tight-knit team, but at the same time manages on-the-ground reporters all over the world. Planet Money is so current it feels like you can go right from reading the headline news to listening to an economic analysis from your favorite host. The ubiquity of Planet Money comes from the spinoff show The Indicator, which is released daily. The production value and scale of stories leave you wondering how they pull it off each week. My best theory: economists are desperately waiting by the phone, and Planet Money is the only one who ever calls.
Best of all, the hosts put in the time conducting experiments to illustrate economic principles firsthand. Titles like “We Bought a Toxic Asset,” “We Invested in Gold,” or “We Set Up a Shell Company” take you through the realities of each respective headline. Altogether, Planet Money’s narrative approach to economics weaves a fun and informative story, leaving you feeling smarter. NPR’s commitment to journalism gives shows like this the infrastructure to thrive, and Planet Money never alienates listeners by hawking ads, pushing investments, or shilling crypto coins.
Huberman Lab
An essential in the science podcast starter kit is the Huberman Lab podcast. Once you get past the corporate advertising pre-roll of paid endorsements, Huberman takes you through college-level textbook explorations of biological principles, punctuated with high-impact guests to reinforce key points with a research perspective. Huberman is a Stanford research professor, though he admits his research now takes a back seat to his science communication and advocacy. Regardless of how active his own lab is, he knows the language and lifestyle of research, making him an excellent host of fellow scientists. I appreciate his ability to ask clarifying questions without concern for being the smartest person in the room. He doesn’t care if he sounds dumb; he wants to learn more, to understand why a mechanism exists in biology. These discussions typically take a translational approach, converting basic research into actions you can take to improve your health. Huberman takes care to recommend low/no-cost examples of lifestyle changes and habits to remove barriers in practicing these science-based health tips. Therefore, I’m obligated to pass on his number one tip: get 10-15 minutes of sunlight in your eyes within an hour of waking!
Hidden Brain
Hidden Brain, hosted by former NPR science correspondent Shankar Vedantam, focuses on the unconscious outputs from our brains that shape behavior and relationships. Again, storytelling combined with expert guests in neurobiology, philosophy, sociology form a perspective I would otherwise have no chance to engage with. Specifically, the “You 2.0” series focuses on relevant science and insights that are directly applicable to your life. For example, the year I graduated college, the episode You 2.0: Decide Already dropped some wisdom on my developing brain. In this episode, Daniel Gilbert promotes the power of commitment to a choice: by restricting options and committing to a plan, one reduces the mental fatigue of second-guessing. By making an irrevocable decision, you are released from the anguish of trying to predict the future. Revisiting this advice is something I find myself doing often, particularly now at another junction in my career. To hear more about that story, I encourage you to read the next JUNC article from Founding Writer Rebecca Miceli.
Radiolab
Finally, where would we be without Radiolab, a massively successful science radio show produced by WNYC. A show with such a powerful hold on me, I can look at titles released in 2015 and remember exactly where I was when I first heard it. This show is how I passed HOURS getting sunburnt while riding a John Deere 1420 mower. I learned about CRISPR from Jad Abumrad and Robert Krulwich before I ever set foot on a college campus, let alone learned cell biology.
The storytelling and scientific rigor should still be held up as an example for science reporting and education. This show is well known for its ability to communicate complex science and ethical dilemmas in a way that brings the listener into the story. Agreed upon by many as the all-time greatest episode, “Colors” explores how we perceive the world around us through an analysis of the physics involved in light. This is a conventionally difficult topic to convey through an audio-only medium, but Radiolab worked with a 150-person choir to turn concepts of light into sound, resulting in an unforgettable experiment in both podcasting and science education. While not every episode involves that many contributors, the high level of production makes every point just as impactful.
So yes, I really do love a good podcast. Whether I’m tuned in or tuned out, I rely on listening to a show while running, working, or cooking. I’ve only covered a fraction of the shows I enjoy, highlighting the most impactful science podcasts spanning the last 12 years. The real power comes in the accessibility to knowledge across many domains. Experts in everything from biology to investment banking are sharing the most valuable insights on podcasts daily, for free. As a lifelong learner, this access introduces and refreshes topics for me on a regular basis. In another life, I probably would have studied economics over biochemistry, but that’s one irrevocable choice I’ll have to live with.