DuK need to raise a lot of money (£3 millon) so it is understandable that they are looking for corporate partnerships but no matter how it i s dressed up as an initiative focused on type 1 kids, Britvic are looking to gain by the assocaiation with a health related charity aka a 'health halo'.
Whilst I'd be glad of a sugary offering if having a hypo, 90% of diabetics are type 2 and even 'no sugar or low sugar' products do little to help those people reverse their insulin resistance.
My only interest in Britvic is that I quite like a splash of their Robinsons Summer Fruit juice in my tap water, and I am not naive enough to take everything a major company says at face value, but I note in passing that in their commentary on the DUK partnership, they mention at the five bullet points near the foot of the page that, amongst other things, 99% of their advertising spend in GB was on no/low added sugar drinks, have a policy that they advertise nothing to under 12s, no higher sugar drinks to under 16s, since 2005 have only advertised sugar free cola, pulled added sugar Robinsons in 2014, and were the first to introduce a stevia sweetened drink in 2012.
Needless to say, I imagine none of that will be enough to satisfy the utopian keyboard warriors, but, speaking as a T1 who still recalls how foul the early diet drinks were when I was dx'd 30 yrs ago, which tasted of TCP, I am glad they are making those sort of efforts.
Some of what they are doing, in terms of advertising etc doesn't seem to be a million miles away from what some posters on this site have been calling for - introducing sugar free options and not firing high sugar options at youths.
They are a soft drinks manufacturer, and it is not their job to find a solution for insulin resistance.
DUK seems to have an active involvement in those sort of issues. Their projects page linked below lists the 114 projects they are currently funding.
I wouldn't be surprised if some posters were to now spend some time nit-picking and finding loopholes in the validity of those projects. I've looked at a few of them - there are descriptions of the docs behind them and the approach - and they seem to represent a wide array of things worth looking at: no-one knows where the answers to some questions are going to come from.
There are obvious differences in approach between DUK and this site. Each to their own - it's a free world, which is fortunate seeing as some posters have suggested their activities should be banned.
This site does its bit for promoting low carb Fair does. DUK does its bit in its own way, and I think it makes many posts on this site look juvenile to criticise DUK so relentlessly when that site has actively funded so much worthwhile research, and, from my point of view as a libre using T1, has also been very visible on the libre campaigning front, much more so than this site.
DUK, as you say, needs to raise money. They are operating in a world where that is not an easy thing to do and it is just far too easy to criticise the judgment calls they have made. I'm sure posters here will have lots of useful guidance on which particular companies they should have partnered with instead.
I am under no illusions here. I don't expect I will have convinced anyone here that the partnership is a good thing and Britvic are not the devil, but I would encourage posters to at least consider the tone of the language they use: the constant slagging of practically everything DUK does is, well, tiresome.
https://www.britvic.com/sustainable-business/healthier-people/diabetes-uk-partnership
https://www.diabetes.org.uk/research/our-research-projects