Definitely. If people talked about physical illness the same way we did about mental illness, we'd diagnose anybody below than the 30th percentile in height with High Shelf Access Disorder and try giving them growth hormones. Mismatch to an artificial environment is not necessarily a disease.
Don't let that put you off. My experience was that I had to try several therapists before I found one that I connected well with. (The same was true with my normal medical doctor and my business lawyer; it's just hard to find good professionals that you can work well with.)
I should also add that the psychiatrist could be wrong about the thoughts, but still might be correct about the feelings that flow from the thoughts.
As I progressed in my treatment for social anxiety, I realized the more appropriate emotional reaction to generalized government data collection was not personal anxiety, in that nobody was actually likely to look at my data or use it against me. I still have my recognition that it's a political danger and my anger about government overreach, but in retrospect I see my anxiety about surveillance as inappropriate, and related to my generally excessive anxiety reactions.
Being able to see the future isn't enough for a financial bet. You have to be able to see the future before other people with money. If something is sufficiently obvious, it will already be priced into the market.
In other words, a financial trade isn't a bet on your insight. It's a bet that your insight is sharper than the person on the other side of the trade.
This Philosophy Bites episode on "Categorizing Mental Disorders" has some good material on the topic: http://philosophybites.com/2016/01/steven-hyman-on-categoris...
And there's a lot of good work under the label "medicalization of deviance".