This was delightful, my favorite in a while. I do have to read academic papers for work periodically, and I thought it struck a very good balance between the dry and distant writing style and the dark material, striking a balance that I found both compelling and humorous. For instance, the researcher in one of the trials mentions observing the trial in an SUV with the engine running so that the nose is pointed toward the road and ready to drive away at speed. If one wants to survive long enough to publish one's research, this is a sensible approach, because the werewolves are obviously dangerous enough to pose a serious risk to anyone in the vicinity, and maybe there have been other researchers before this one who were less cautious and died before publishing. And I think little details like this dispel the apparent emotionlessness of the researcher. That distance is part of the academic style, and is meant to keep the paper on point to the research, but the researcher is clearly terrified at that point, and has a lot of empathy for the people they're dealing with.
Because of the style, there were a lot of parts that really shouldn't have been funny that kind of ended up being that way. For me, the way that the hunter was described as continuing to shoot with an expression of extreme grief was one of those, and then I felt guilty for laughing--his grief wasn't funny, his death wasn't funny, but the distant observation of extreme grief was very oddly juxtaposed and out of place and if it had been reviewed by a publisher I think that part probably would've been edited out. To me that was a part that showed the empathy in the researcher--they didn't just want to document that the guy died in a suicidal fashion, but that he was not confused or stunned by fright but was knowingly taking this act as his own way of mourning, and that mention in the text was acknowledgment of that mourning that technically had no bearing on the efficacy of the weapon and so didn't properly deserve to be in the paper, but I thought it enhanced it as a story.
I also quite liked that the framing of the story made it clear that this could be our world. Werewolves are apparently not widely considered plausible in this world, enough so that the scientific community won't even bother peer reviewing a paper based on the subject, forcing the researcher to find non-traditional publishing methods (like a podcast) to make their research not be wasted effort. I also appreciated that it went out of its way to point out that the standards for human trials were not met. For one, getting approval would've been certainly impossible if no one believes in this, and also I'm not sure how one would possibly conduct a "hunting monsters in the wild" study without putting people at risk.
I wish more stories would mix science and fantasy like this story does. There's nothing about fantasy that repels science. On the contrary, if fantastical things proved observable and repeatable, then science would be all over them to understand their characteristics.