Is there a considerable difference in the toxins inhaled between a filtered or a non-filtered cigarette?
Yes.
-N
For the first couple of years the “micronite” filter in Kent cigarettes was asbestos.
I vaguely recall reading somewhere (quite possibly in a source of dubious credibility) that filtered cigarettes are actually more dangerous than unfiltered. I believe the hypothesis was that the filter cools the smoke which somehow makes it more dangerous. As I recall, the source said the purpose of the filter was not to make the cigarette safer, but to make the smoke taste less harsh. I know this source must be pretty old because it was many years ago that I read it. Filter techonolgy has probably improved since then.
This site says that smokers of low-tar, unfiltered cigarettes are less likely to get squamous cell cancers in the upper part of the pulmonary system but more likely to get adenocarcinoma in the lower pulmonary system.
This Science Fair Project also makes interesting reading.