The author, [[Joshua Pearce]], claims the method enables researchers in every discipline to develop research tools at low costs following his previous research in open-source hardware published in ''[[Science (journal)|Science]]''.<ref>Pearce, Joshua M. 2012. “[http://www.sciencemag.org/content/337/6100/1303.summary Building Research Equipment with Free, Open-Source Hardware.]” ''Science'' '''337''' (6100): 1303–1304.</ref><ref>[http://www.labmanager.com/news/2013/11/how-scientists-can-cut-costs-by-making-their-own-lab-equipment How Scientists Can Cut Costs by Making Their Own Lab Equipment] - Lab Manager - November 19, 2013</ref> These claims have been generally supported by others using the techniques, such as those in the in [[DIYbio]] community.<ref>[http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/38546/title/Opinion--Science-Counterculture/ Science Counterculture: On taking DIYbio to the next level] - The Scientist - December 9, 2013</ref> While discussing the book in an interview with ''3-D Printing Industry'', Pearce has claimed to save thousands of dollars in his own lab,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://3dprintingindustry.com/2013/10/18/printers-pearce-interview-3d-printers-peaces-dr-joshua-pearce/|title=Printers for Pearce: An Interview with 3D Printers for Peace’s Dr. Joshua Pearce|work=3D Printing Industry}}</ref> and his various studies on the economics of printing lab equipment, such as a ''[[PLOS ONE]]'' article on open-source optics have generally found over 90% savings.<ref>Zhang C, Anzalone NC, Faria RP, Pearce JM (2013) [http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0059840 Open-Source 3D-Printable Optics Equipment]. ''PLoS ONE'' 8(3): e59840. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0059840</ref> A study on the use of [[3D printing]] in this context cited this book as also being good for the environment.<ref>Kreiger, M.(2013). Environmental Life Cycle Analysis of Distributed 3-D Printing and Conventional Manufacturing of Polymer Products. ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering.</ref>
