You clarified my query well with: “No, I do not mean to imply that we consider the possibilities, only that we can live with the possibilities without experiencing anxiety.”
Surely, there lies the difference? So many things could be potentially harmful, but often we just don’t consider the possibilities.
I still feel that some of the things you listed, most of us can say, with certainty, we will never do. For instance, without suffering some form of brain damage, I think most people can be assured they won’t suddenly attack and kill a friend. I think most straight men can say 100 per cent they won’t suddenly become gay! The same can be said for most people when it comes to molesting a child. You are born gay/paedophile etc, you don’t suddenly change. A car accident, of course, is very different and yet most give little thought to the possibility.
You wrote: “…Yet I have no anxiety about them, which shows that I can live with these possibilities, or in other words, I can live with the uncertainty. And yes, it's partly because the chances are so slim. But for people with OCD, it doesn't matter how slim the chances are. Just the sheer possibility of their feared consequence is unacceptable.”
It sounds as if you have actually considered these possibilities, but dismissed them because of the remote chance of their occurring. However, I truly believe that some things never cross a person’s mind (with or without OCD). I certainly do not find the possibility of so many things you listed unacceptable. With some, it’s because I do believe 100 per cent they will never occur (OK, it may be 99.9999, but that’s good enough for me - even with OCD!). Others, where I realise there is a possibly, I can give no explanation for - I can’t say why I am unperturbed. Nor can I begin to explain why I obsess over the things I do. I feel this is the case for most of us.
I think we can over analyse. I don’t believe we will discover (in our lifetimes, at least) why a person (with or without OCD) will worry excessively over one thing, but have no concern for another (when both could quite possibly occur. In fact, paradoxically, the thing they panic about is often less likely to occur than that which they remain unconcerned). The brain is simply too complex to fathom, I believe many problems are down to ‘wring’, rather than life experiences.
I find your suggestion on how to deal with an obsession with a contaminant, when no fear of harm is linked to it, rather strange. I have never come across such a theory before. I will suggest this at the next group session I attend, to ascertain whether those who experience revulsion, rather than a fear of harm, believe it might help. I truly can’t see how it will and I know those who have been to specialist units (from our group) have never been advised to use such an approach. If you are revolted by something, how can visualising it causing harm stop the feelings of revulsion?
We have members of the forum who fit into this category, I’d be very interested to hear their views.