Jazz is not Blues and Blues is not Jazz.......

According to David Lindley, every song can be made into a reggae song.
I largely disregard genre, other than the short pitch- most music (unless you dig deeply into early ethnic stuff that pre-dates recording technology) has a variety of influences. Genres are for marketing, for ranking (ala Billboard) and radio and its modern equivalents.
To the more specific point, listen to Alice Coltrane’s "Turiya and Ramakrishna" from the Ptah album and tell me that isn’t blues. (Of course, not all blues is jazz or vice versa). But lumping stuff together, making lists and categorizing things is something that humans seem to do, however misleading. It does miss the finer grain details of influences, though. I’ve loved the blues since I was a kid, whether it’s early Delta stuff or later electric blues ala Chicago or elsewhere. Jazz- got tired of the warhorses but a few years ago, my interest was rekindled by so-called "spiritual jazz," "soul jazz" and the output of lots of session players who turned inward after mainstream jazz lost its commercial attraction by the early ’70s. So much music, so little time....

They are definitely different genres but jazz musicians have played the blues since the 40's. Most of what they played was "bop and blues" for decades.  Countless album titles like "Coltrane Plays the Blues" have been made over the years.

Interestingly blues musicians seem much less interested in playing jazz however.

three easy payments -- It’s because jazz is a hell of a lot more difficult to play.

Exactly.

“Difficult” is not an easy thing to define; it’s all more complicated and subtle than that. The best Jazz players are not always the best Blues players. In fact, they seldom are. What that does that tell you about “difficulty”?