Phycus founder Vik Pandit’s conversation with Green Conversations podcast host Lorraine Dahlmeier reveals the truth behind “natural” glycolic acid and why the source matters more than the label.

“Natural exfoliant” is a phrase you’ll see on plenty of skincare labels. Glycolic acid is in your toner, your peel, your $80 serum, and your $12 drugstore white label – and almost none of it started out as fruit. It’s the smallest alpha hydroxy acid, enabling it to penetrate skin more effectively than lactic or citric acid, dissolving the bonds between dead surface cells so newer, brighter skin shows through underneath. It’s been a skincare staple since the 1970s, and the market keeps growing, up roughly 6% year over year.

But almost nobody buying it knows where it actually comes from.

Vik Pandit, founder of Phycus Biotechnologies, sat down with Lorraine Dahlmeier on Formula Botanica’s Green Beauty Conversations podcast to talk about that gap, and what his company is doing to close it.

The Fruit Acid That (Mostly) Isn’t

The manufacturing process for glycolic acid hasn’t significantly changed since DuPont invented it in the 1930s. Nearly all commercial glycolic is made from formaldehyde or monochloroacetic acid, depending on where in the world it’s produced. Real fruit-extracted versions exist, but they’re weak, impure, and expensive to make at scale, so the industry has stuck with the petrochemical route for close to a century.

Pandit doesn’t mince words about the disconnect this creates. Glycolic has long been marketed as a “fruit acid,” he told Dahlmeier, and that framing has let the industry lean on a naturality claim that doesn’t hold up. In his words, “There’s a bit of greenwashing going on”.

Not All Petrochemicals Are Created Equal

Pandit pointed out that even within conventional, petrochemical-sourced glycolic acid, quality varies significantly from supplier to supplier.

“There is a difference between the petrochemicals sourced from some suppliers versus other suppliers – a huge difference to the impurity profile. So it’s important to understand and work with reputable suppliers, and know the quality that those suppliers stand by.”

It’s a reminder that “chemically identical” doesn’t mean “identical impact.” Impurity profiles – trace formaldehyde, sulfates, dichloroacetic acid – differ by manufacturer, and those differences are largely invisible to the brands and formulators buying the ingredient.

A Different Starting Point for a True Natural Exfoliant

Phycus makes glycolic acid a different way entirely: through fermentation, using microorganisms that convert renewable feedstocks (FSC-certified wood and waste molasses) directly into glycolic acid. No formaldehyde. No petrochemical starting material. The process, which grew out of Pandit’s PhD research, led to Purolic™, the first commercially available fermentation-derived glycolic acid.

The sustainability case is straightforward.

Petrochemical feedstocks carry embedded carbon that gets released across the product’s life cycle, and the manufacturing process itself relies on fossil fuel energy. Plant-based feedstocks, on the other hand, begin as atmospheric CO2, so the cycle closes differently.

The Irritation Surprise

But the more surprising finding, Pandit said, wasn’t about carbon at all, but about irritation. Phycus ran IL-1α irritation studies, published in SOFW journal, comparing Purolic against conventional petrochemical glycolic acid and against leading fruit-extract versions. The result was a statistically significant lower irritation profile for Purolic than both (including the fruit extracts, which tend to carry their own impurities from color and odor compounds).

“That was a huge moment for us,” Pandit said. “It told us that the manufacturing process matters in making a better product.”

Pandit has also cited a 40% reduction in carbon footprint versus conventional processes, backed by a full lifecycle analysis.

Why This Matters

Pandit’s bigger point isn’t really about glycolic acid, but about how the industry talks about sourcing. 

Brands increasingly want to make sustainability claims, but a claim like “naturally sourced” doesn’t automatically mean a product is a genuinely natural exfoliant, and “chemically identical” doesn’t mean the source is irrelevant. 

What actually matters: traceability (Phycus’s suppliers carry FSC certification down to the region the feedstock came from), verified impurity data, and independent testing… not just the story on the label.

As Pandit put it, the goal is for formulators and consumers alike to know exactly how their glycolic acid is sourced today, and to understand that the sourcing doesn’t have to stay the way it’s always been.

Want More?

Vik Pandit’s full conversation with Lorraine Dahlmeier is available now on the Green Beauty Conversations podcast – Spotify, Apple Podcasts, and YouTube.

FAQ

Is glycolic acid a natural exfoliant? 

Most commercial glycolic acid is synthesized from petrochemical sources like formaldehyde or monochloroacetic acid, despite frequently being marketed as a “fruit acid.” True fruit-derived glycolic acid exists but is impure and costly to produce at scale. Fermentation-derived versions, like Phycus’s Purolic, are made from renewable feedstocks such as wood and molasses rather than petrochemicals.

What’s the difference between synthetic and bio-based glycolic acid? 

Both are the same molecule, but they’re produced differently and can carry different impurity profiles. Synthetic, petrochemical-derived glycolic acid can retain trace formaldehyde or other byproducts depending on the manufacturing process and supplier. Fermentation-derived glycolic acid is produced by microorganisms converting plant-based feedstocks, without a formaldehyde starting material.

Does the source of glycolic acid affect how it performs on skin? 

According to irritation testing Phycus published in SOFW journal, fermentation-derived Purolic showed a statistically significant lower irritation profile than both conventional petrochemical glycolic acid and fruit-extract versions, suggesting that manufacturing source can influence how an ingredient performs even when the underlying molecule is identical.

Why does supplier choice matter if the chemical is the same? 

Impurity profiles vary significantly between suppliers, even for chemically identical ingredients. Working with reputable, traceable suppliers — and understanding the quality standards they hold themselves to — is one of the only ways formulators can account for that variation.