Thanks for your concern. I am doing just fine at 2-2.5 packs a day (non-filtered) for over 3 decades, despite having not visited docs since 1991 (or maybe because of that). These are some of my discussions on the subject on FR: thread1, thread2, thread3, thread4 (omitting few).
There was also a more recent debate (with some of new research data I found since then), at the nootropic & life-extension forum here (the second half of the post has TOC for the discussion highlights). As always, there was no contest -- all the hard science (experiment, lab analysis) was on my side, while poor antismoking hysterics could only find soft/junk science (see items #8, #15, #16 in the above TOC for explanation of the difference).
The more one learns what real science (in contrast to second hand and third hand retelling) actually discovered about this ancient medicinal plant, the better it looks. Any time some new biochemical lever of longevity is discovered (usually hailed as the latest 'fountain of youth' in the press), the literature search uncovers that the tobacco smoke, if it has any effect on it, it pushes the same lever in the right direction.
They are still here. Worse they dispute the scientific evidence that smoking puts a fetus at risk. Sick individuals trying to justify their own addiction, by ignoring/downgrading the risk to the unborn.