I was just reading through the list of differences you posted from that link, and it does sound like you a significant majority of aspects more in common with the hypervigilance construct. Just pulling a couple of the comparisons, really fairly randomly:

-the paranoiac is convinced of their plausibility
-the hypervigilant person is aware of how implausible their experience sounds and often doesn't want to believe it themselves (disbelief and denial)
-the paranoiac feels persecuted by a person or persons unknown (eg "they're out to get me")
-the hypervigilant person is hypersensitized but is often aware of the inappropriateness of their heightened sensitivity, and can identify the person responsible for their psychiatric injury

No contest, right?

One of the first things about what you were saying that I'd noticed is that your concerns are really specific, and that you're really examining them, really aware, which just doesn't seem like a fit for paranoid or delusional behavior to me; but seeing the comparisons side by side like that really helps to put some definition around it.

Since many people don't even know the term "hypervigilance", but are certainly familiar with paranoia, it's easy to understand how any of us could misattribute the behaviors as all being associated with paranoia. Enlightening. I'm starting to understand how my last psychiatrist, who did not specialize in trauma, seemed so convinced I was delusional.. while I just kept shaking my head thinking, why are we wasting time on this? Trying to figure out if the verifiable past really did occur?