Thanks to all -
it is such a nice series of encouraging comments! And it's so true that doctors tend to think that we are 'imagining things' that aren't really there. This can be dangerous, inasmuch that they don't pay attention to real physical trouble as they'd do with 'sane' patients, and thus deny us the right treatment for that.
Because I am both a patient and a literature researcher in OCD, I'd say this about it: doctors tend to lag behind current insights in the disorder. Not one week, not one year, but whole decades. They're still heavily influenced by old theories and old therapeutical convictions. Perhaps they think that we are narcissists, borderline psychotics, Muenchhausen-By-Proxy patients, or merely attention seekers.
All of this is sheer nonsense. But these are fancy labels that even first year medicine patients use to impress their friends and acquaintances with. They're popular, in short. The picture of OCD as a neurological disorder is much less fashionable - and yet it needs to become a standard view, if we want to make progress. It will help doctors to see it in the realm of 'real' problems, instead of 'imagined' ones.
Moreover: the medical profession needs to take a good look at itself. More scientific insight is needed there. That would have great benefits: doctors would become less of authority figures, who are always right because of the fact that they are doctors. They would gain authority because of their knowledge; and that is a different thing. I experienced that when I presented them with facts about variations in the brains of patients with OCD, they became irritated, and changed the subject immediately... you may guess the reason for that!
Doctors work too much by the cook book method: patient presents with problem; the doc takes a big book, looks up the type of medication that's advised, and prescribes it.