A lot of this article is just playing "gotcha", where she's pointing out technically a lot of cultural glosses about diabetes only applies to type-2 diabetes. However type 2 diabetes occurs at a rate >10x as much as type 1 diabetes [1], and it's the type that is more preventable by behavior and diet change.
Statements close to the "myths" she's debunking is approximately true, while her "technical facts" if not handled with care will lead to far worse wrong beliefs.
Approximate myth that we want: "Generally, diabetes is strongly related to high BMI and bad diet which often includes diets high in sugar". Technical truth that muddies the conversation: "Actually the above relationship excludes T1D, which is a vast minority of diabetes."
Approximate myth we want: "Many diabetes is preventable by eating well." Technical truth that muddies the conversation: "Actually some T1D is adult onset 2-3%, so you may not be able to prevent those!"
Approximate myth we want: "Bargain hunting for medications when medically equivalent is good, especially generics." Technical truth: "Actually there are medical differences between different insulin formulations, because unlike small-molecule drugs, different formulations are not biologically equivalent. Some expensive modern formulations are good."
--
A doctor with knowledge about public health and has good writing skills should reconsider writing an article like this. Why not go after real harmful myths like anti-vaxxers? Or how about rewording the article so that the myth is actually approximately bad, like "Bad diets are okay for diabetes as long as you avoid sugars".