That's the point, once you have far less cases filed as 'mimimal symptoms' to 'mild', no further measure has to be taken than having you avoid contacts with elderly. Maybe enough to fulfill the curiosity of many but not of whom is used to dive deeper below the surface for more convincing explanations, especially if figures delivered in Germany are BY FAR lower than any other industrialized country. Germans claims that they were able to prevent the virus making its way to the most vulnerable group of people, and this comes down, they say, to a mix of timeliness and medical equipment/capacity in better supply. They were more capable to deploy a great deal of swabs in very short time to random test people close to the first reported cases, detect a lot of younger infected people with very mild/no symptoms, stop the propagation in its early stages. This would also explain the unbalance to younger age classes in the distribution graph, compared to countries with a pretty heavy infection history so far but roughly similar age structure. No doubt Germany can count on a higher number of beds in units equipped for this kind of treatments, swabs were distributed very rapidly and in great number, we could also guess the sampling methods adopted in Germany were more effective than anywhere else. That could partly explain why the contry is apparently yielding amazing success in its early efforts to contain the spread of the contagion while neighbouring countries are struggling to cope. But we may argue on their timeliness, since most counties made their move a week or more after Italy, so at this stage we cannot afford any serious discussion if and how long it will take to countries that started later to catch up with Italy and fill the gap, so this part of the story could probably casts a first major doubt on how Germany managed to keep figures so dramatically lower. Time will possibily raise the tally and thus letality rate to a much more reliable level (?).
Second point of discussion is the count of the number of fatalties. Until recently, Italian media (I guess none of the readers will argue we're using Italy as the strongest benchmark in this affair) made a big fuss about the way medical authorities are handling and delivering data so far, especially about how Covid-19 cases with fatal outcome should be best classified. Were they 'caused by' or 'with' corona virus infection? No matter the presence of a number of concurrent factors or contributing causes (other serious illnesses, secondary infections, even causalties from therapy mishandling) I assume that if the death was direct consequence of Covid-19 infection, the same should be linked with the virus, just as italian hospitals actually do. I think it makes no sense to quibble weather the case would not have turned out fatal were there no other serious underlying illnesses of whatsoever severity.
So far so good for Italy, but are we sure Germany is applying the same counting criteria? To my knowledge there is no international standard to comply with or sort of common reviewing mechanism, and even if there was any, WHO and other third party institutions do not seem much concerned about how countries are now recording data that are feeding the official reports on a daily basis, although they should be much concerned given the magnitude of the issue.... We all see how Iran's leaders are using their powers to tweak figures, lest the real magnitude the epidemics would not be discovered and exploited against the establishment. Iran has a long tradition in and deceiving its own public opinion and international community, but as any countries are left a great leeway to present figures to the wide audience as they prefer, I don't see any reason for anyone should not elaborate some form of cover-up to promote a different story-telling.