When Lab Work Went Viral

How fluorescent gels, pipette ASMR, and TikTok trends are reshaping science communication

A few years ago, “lab life” meant late nights with broken centrifuges, mismatched gloves, and postdoc-fueled existential dread. Now? It’s neon gels synced to Taylor Swift, pipette clicks as ASMR, and scientists lip-syncing while explaining CRISPR.

Welcome to the age of “aesthetic science”, a digital space where lab life isn’t just about data, but also about drama, visuals, and vibe.

Science is going viral, but not in the way we’re used to. And that shift says something important about how the public sees (and doesn’t see) the work behind the breakthroughs. Yet, it prompts a question I can’t shake:

Is this the new frontier of science communication, or have we simply turned the lab into a stage of content factor

The Rise of the Science Influencer

This isn’t your old-school science blog. With  growing number of science creators racking up views, lab coats are fast becoming the new ring lights. Though still a small slice of the research world, these influencers are a blend of educator, entertainer, and aesthetic curator. While some strive to make science accessible to the general public, others delve into the insider culture of the lab, crafting content that captures the joy, frustration, and absurdity of research life.

Take @NileRed and  @Big Manny, two chemistry creators who bring serious flair. NileRed transforms chemical curiosities into cinematic spectacles with hypnotic visuals and slow-motion drama. Think Mr. Beast, but with glassware and goggles. Big Manny, meanwhile, brings backyard block-party vibes to bold chemistry demos, making science loud, proud, and undeniably cool.

Then there’s the relatability crowd:  @LabShenanigans (a chaotic love child of lab life and meme culture and @the_lab_life  whose “lab confessional” moments capture the tragic comedy of daily research mishaps. If you’ve ever cried into a pipette tip, this corner of TikTok sees you.

And for the info-hungry scrollers, creators like  @askaneuroscientist and @renegadescienceteacher bring brain science and biology to life with bite-sized explanations, punchlines, and performance.

These creators make science fun, weird, and oddly satisfying. They’re building audiences that many academic journals can only dream of. And honestly? It’s exciting to see science in people’s feeds without the words “crisis” or “funding cut” attached.

While we’re all here for some pipette choreography, there’s a real tension underneath the glitter filter.

Does turning research into content help science, or just perform it?

Aesthetic Science: Style Meets Substance?

The appeal of this movement is clear that science becomes relatable. It humanizes researchers. It invites curiosity. It says, “Hey, we’re not robots in lab coats. We dance to Lizzo too.”

But it also raises questions: Does this trend help build public trust in science, or does it risk oversimplifying it? Does the push for visuals and virality come at the cost of nuance?

Much like any other form of communication, the answer lies in balance.

• A recent study looked at 150 science TikToks and found that audiences actually preferred substance over style. The best-performing videos? Ones that summarized actual papers or explained real concepts, no explosion required. Even more surprising: 84% of viewers said these videos made them trust science more. That’s right. TikTok did what decades of peer review couldn’t.
• Another study explored how TikTok science communicators navigate norms and values, highlighting the balance between authenticity and academic integrity in content creation.
• Research focusing on adolescents’ TikTok usage revealed that while the platform can foster social connection and emotional resilience, excessive use may reduce users’ ability to set boundaries, emphasizing the need for mindful engagement.

These findings underscore the potential of platforms like TikTok to enhance public understanding and trust in science when used thoughtfully.

So, what’s the problem?

When the Medium Becomes the Message

The risk is when the look of science becomes more important than the point of it.

We’ve all seen it: flashy clips with zero context, oversimplified “science hacks,” or creators jumping on trends without fact-checking first. (If I see one more video about how “we only use 10% of our brain,” I might use the rest of mine to scream.)

And while many of these come from non-scientists, that’s exactly the problem when experts aren’t part of the conversation, misinformation takes the mic. In fact, studies suggest that combating misinformation isn’t just about corrections; it’s about volume. The more scientists “flood the zone” with clear, accurate content, the more likely we are to shift the narrative.

The platforms reward engagement, not accuracy. And when success is measured in likes instead of learning, things get… slippery.

That’s not to say scientists shouldn’t entertain. Heck, that’s why I’m writing this. But we’ve got to ask:
Are we making science more accessible, or just more aesthetic?

What This Means for SciComm

Aesthetic science isn’t replacing traditional outreach, it’s evolving it. It opens new doors, particularly for younger audiences who aren’t reading journal articles but are watching TikTok. It also democratizes visibility, giving underrepresented voices in science a platform to be seen and heard.

The challenge? Making sure the visuals don’t eclipse the substance. That science doesn’t become a prop but stays the protagonist.

As someone invested in both research and communication, I see this trend not as a threat but as an invitation. An invitation to make science feel less distant and more like something you can touch, laugh at, or even dance with.

Because sometimes, the best way to understand the work behind the bench is to see it lit up, slowed down, and set to music.

So Where Do I Stand?

I love the chaos. I love the memes. I love seeing diverse scientists breaking stereotypes and showing up in places where science wasn’t always welcome.

But I also believe we have a responsibility. If we’re going to dance with the algorithm, we better not let it lead the whole way.

Science communication can be funny, weird, beautiful, and still honest. In fact, the best creators already do this. They balance engagement with integrity. They teach, even when they entertain.

Because the goal isn’t just to go viral.
It’s to make science stick long after the scroll ends.