As mentioned before, I called Biosante and spoke to Alan Zachary - media relations. His name and number are on their website if you don't believe me (and he apparently answers the phone).
In any event, he confirmed to me that the technology in the Science article was Ceregene technology, of which BPAX holds a minority interest throught the CEGE merger.
Looking at the quote again - it may be true that the genesis of that technology occurred at CEGE, prior to the spin-off. That said, based on Zachary's comment - it is now held by Ceregene. I specifically asked if BPAX would be doing a press release and he said they would NOT be issuing one.
Best case scenario here is that BPAX is working on a merger with Ceregene to bring the technology back into the fold. Second best would be for Ceregene to run with it, go public and make BPAX's investment more liquid - option to hold and grow or sell to raise cash. There may be discussions at different levels that aren't transparent immediately, but on the surface, this looks like a bit of a mess up in communication by Simes.
Anyway - do your due diligence - I had to do some digging, as I was considering transferring around funds to do a major buy. Not so compelling anymore.
Your follow-up on the story is much appreciated. Thanks for posting. Hmm, which do I appreciate more, a sensible discussion of BPAX as a long-term investment or that incessant CAPPED YAPPING of Techdolt? I've heard a lot of thoughtful comments pro and con since the CEGE folks migrated over.