CavityQED

I wouldn't mention it the way you worded it here. I would turn it around to your favor. There are two different things here that you should mention in two different moments.
It seems clear you have to talk about your diabetes because there was a major change in your life. But in the SOP narrate your story not as an excuse, but as a victory. It talks about your resilience, your commitment, and your ability to do A work. Focus on the second two years that reflect how you manage it. 
Once you are accepted to a program, you can talk with your department and student health about support available for you. 

There is no wrong decision in this issue because you have 2 great options to choose from. So take a deep breath and relax. You've in a great position right now. Because you have 2 great short term options on the table right now, I think it's best to consider your long term goals. If you don't want to pursue an academic path, why did you apply to the PhD program in the first place? What goals were you hoping to achieve? 
Is this job opportunity a short term contract or long term/permanent? 
If it were me, I'd take the job because great jobs in the film industry are very hard to come by and you don't want to work in academia anyway. If you still want to get a PhD in 2-3 years time, you can apply to Fulbright again. With a much stronger application than your last one (due to all of the great experience you'll acquire at this new job), odds are you'll be able to get another Fulbright opportunity if you want to at another time. You might have the option of pursing a PhD part time later on and your employer might even cover part of the tuition costs. 
If you only have a bachelor's degree and were planning to do a combined master's/PhD, then I'd seriously consider doing an online master's because not having a graduate degree could hold you back in your career for future promotions. If this is your situation, I also have to commend you for getting such a job without a master's degree. It really demonstrates the high level of skill and talent that you have to get so far without the education. 

OP has reasons to prefer the name brand and is somewhat indifferent to the actual quality of the education for those stated reasons.
The thing about this thread I don't get is why someone who manged to get into a "Finance Master in a top 10 program" with a 2.0 from a "world top 20" thinks anyone here can offer BETTER advice on how to get into a top program with a low GPA. Seems like OP nailed the impossible - 2.0 GPA --> Top 10! Is anyone on this board going to be able to beat that?

"It is impossible to predict what will be hot in six years (also, six years?)"
Not my question. My question was about the rate of change. And obviously it would be ridiculous to expect anyone to accurately predict what will be popular in half a decade or more.
But I'm asking about the rate of change. This can be as simple as saying, "Cloning was a hot skill 5 years ago, but now it's worthless because chemical synthesis is about to supplant cloning and people will just buy a gblock of whatever genetic construct they want." (This is just a made up example.)
"(also, six years?)"
...Yes? Go look up your program and tell me six years isn't a good approximation of whatever number they give you for earning a phd.
"Instead, study what interests you and learn the techniques that will help you examine your topic of interest with the highest resolution."
Thank you, but:
1. I'd still like to be aware of how my job sector works.
2. You can't just say "Go with the technique with the highest resolution." It's not that clear-cut. And my personal experience is that people have more control over the direction of their project than they might appreciate.

It is impossible to predict what will be hot in six years (also, six years?). You should not learn a technique just because you think it will make you a more attractive candidate for jobs. Instead, study what interests you and learn the techniques that will help you examine your topic of interest with the highest resolution. I started grad school with no intention of doing NGS, big data manipulation, CRISPR, or iPSCs, but my sincere interests put me in a lab that does all four. 
Pick the field that interests you the most, then learn the techniques that will help you do the best science. Use your PhD to learn to be the best scientist you can be. Techniques are secondary to that. 

Big caveat. Also, there isn't a dwindling market for academics in engineering at research institutions. It is tight, but it isn't dwindling.
 
OP, your perceived ability to bring in grants will be what gets you into academia. Since no one can truly know whether you'll flourish at bringing in $, hiring committees use proxies like citation counts, etc ... It would be foolish for me to suggest that the name on the diploma doesn't matter. However, you advisor's research output will matter much more. Or your postdoc advisor's. I am unfamiliar with your field, but I have seen doofuses in photonics turn down UC Santa Barbara for Masters diploma mills like Penn because ... Ivy! Same goes for morons who chose Yale over Colorado for optics. 
Look at the research output of your advisors. Talk to your mentors at your UG institution. Princeton might even be the better choice, but the name brand should not be the deciding reason.
 
EDIT: You might find this useful regarding faculty hiring - (http://armani.usc.edu/advice/)

Yeah, you're seriously overthinking how much people care. Hiring managers care about your research experience, skill set, and how well you'd fit in a team dynamic. No one cares where you went to school unless its a top tier school (which all three of your choices are) and in that case maybe - and I seriously mean MAYBE - it will give you a tiny extra advantage over other candidates. For the most part though, no one cares. This isn't like law or business; in biotech, your skill set matters exponentially more than what school you went to. If you want to go into biotech, your number one goal should be to expose yourself to as much cutting-edge technology as possible (NGS, CRISPR, flow cytometry, etc). The exact ranking of an already elite university will mean literally nothing. 
And no need to apologize from doubting a random person from the internet. But yeah, I've been in the industry (and multiple companies) for the past 4 years so I do know what I'm talking about here. Hope this helps. 

Really? Hiring managers would see them as equivalent? And you know this from experience in industry?
Sorry, I realize it sounds like I'm doubting you, but I need to be sure.

^ well duh, but isn't this form for stressing out and venting or should I take my therapy elsewhere?

All right.
Applied to:
Caltech Biology, Stanford Biosciences, Berkeley MCB, and UCSF Tetrad
Accepted to:
Stanford Biosciences, Berkeley MCB, and UCSF Tetrad
Caltech never got back to me that after that online interview.
What was it you gleaned from that 10 minute window, Caltech? Fuck you.

Hey,
So, I think you would be a good candidate for the programs that you listed as long as you get a good GRE score. A lot of the times GRE scores can be overlooked but some schools screen based on numbers too so I'd say just try the best you can to get the highest score. I don't think you should be discouraged by your MCAT score.  You can get a high score on the GRE if you put in a good deal of work. Personally, I worked on the math section the most because that was what I knew I could do the best on as long as I don't make mistakes.  As for the reading section, I memorized around 200-300 words from the most common list that Magoosh published, which helped a lot.  For writing, I'd say, it's helpful to just look through a couple of the writing prompts and practice coming up with suitable examples.  It can really wear you down to have to write the whole essay so this is what I'd suggest. 
In terms of what you are doing during your gap year, have you also thought of applying for the NIH postbac position?  A lot of grad schools really like NIH postbacs.  When I interviewed at UPenn and Stanford, there were a lot of NIH postbacs there and when talking to faculty members, it was definitely helpful to mention my experiences at NIH.  Also, at NIH, they give you a lot of resources to help you through the application cycle as well as providing you the platform for being introduced to different types of research since there's tons of seminars/ lectures going on all the time.  I also was able to present at conferences that NIH hosted and there's opportunities to boost your resume by signing up for best poster/travel awards etc.  If you want tips for getting into the NIH postbac program, after submitting your application, contact individual PIs that you're interested in and also join ClubPCR since open positions will be advertised in this group occasionally.  I think it helps to also just visit NIH and just go around labs asking for openings.  Alot of postbacs have gotten in this way too.  In terms of the fact that you are not doing research that you hope to do in the future, you need to just come up with your own story and the reasoning behind why you pursued certain interests/ research and why you hope to go into a certain field that's not related.  You don't necessarily need to be doing the research you're interested in at the moment although it will help.  You can perhaps explain why you choice the neuro lab and then what made you take interest in the field of virology...and how you actively pursued it by.....gap year stuff etc. 
I hope this helped.  I've also been through the same/similar situation as you are going through right now and I'd say my advice is just to put in as much as you can and it'll pay off in the end.  I think you are a very well qualified applicant and just make sure to highlight your uniqueness and strengths of your application in the essay and how that would make you a great scientist.  I wanted to also point out that everyone is going to have different opinions about what I've suggested so take my advice with a grain of salt. 
Wish you the best of luck. 

I seem to be one of the only one on this thread crazy enough to say no to Harvard. I'll be attending Penn CAMB in the fall