Alright, so say the OP has a 0.1% chance of being on the wrong end of a terrible life-altering injury in any given month. Say out of pocket costs were not the $1,700 for the hospital visit quoted before but as much as $30,000. The OP should be aiming to pay $30/month in that situation, maybe a little more. Say the OP has a 1% chance of being on the wrong end of a terrible life-altering injury requiring $30,000 in out-of-pocket costs. The OP should be aiming to pay $300/month in that situation, maybe a little more.
Now you could argue that paying $30,000 out of pocket would be entirely impossible for the OP to pay under any circumstance and so he/she may want to offer a premium and be willing to spend more every month in order to defray the risk of having to pay it all in one month. That would be an argument I would make as well. The OP (or anyone buying health insurance -- or forgoing higher wages so that their employer can buy it for them) would be losing money in both the short- and long-term but would be able to avoid personal bankruptcy.
However, in the scenario where the OP has to pay $1700 out-of-pocket vs $700 out-of-pocket (and those are the only costs that the OP would incur) on an insurance plan that costs upwards of $450 a month, the OP would lose money on the deal -- even in the event of a payout. That doesn't consider the far more likely possibility that there is no payout and the net loss would be much more.
milias, as long as you don't plan on getting horribly injured this summer, you shouldn't feel compelled to buy insurance against that unlikely event. However, none of us are doctors or know anything about your personal health situation or aversion to risk. Any advice I would give is purely speculative on my end and based on the choices I myself would personally make and nothing I would recommend for you. But best of luck with your decision.